Re: Updates on Oracle and SQL Server

On Wed, 2 Jan 2002 13:37:39 -0000, "Garrick Bigwood" <garrickb_at_software360.com> wrote:

>Hello,
>
>I am doing some comparison testing between SQL Server and Oracle for
>evaluation of possible migration of existing app from SQL server to Oracle.
>The tests involve doing full table Updates (e.g. Update table1 set col1 =
>5; - this is basically what our system does!!) on 500,000 rows. Running this
>on Oracle 8.1.6 on Sun Enterprise 450 server /Solaris 8 (fairly old
>hardware)with files spread across 3 disks , I can get this to run at about
>40-45 secs; with SQL Server 7 on a Compaq server with Raid 5 (3 disks) and
>1.1 Gb CPU(server approx 6 months old) this takes about 3 - 4 secs. The
>problem with Oracle seems to be the I/O sub-system and the amount of
>physical writes done to datafiles and rollback files(also redo of course),
>and I'm not sure if when SQL Server completes transaction it has completed
>the writes to disk as Oracle has which makes comparison difficult. I think
>maybe the big difference in times I am seeing is combination of architecture
>differences(SQL Server would only do two writes to Transaction Logs and
>datafiles) and hardware differences (plus I am not using a Volume manager on
>the Unix server). Has anyone similar experience of testing SQL Server and
>Oracle, is Oracle slow at Updates, is it the hardware or both or ...??
>thanks.
>Garrick.
>
>
>

Why do you repeat this question????? It was responded by several people as you might be aware.
No doubt you have an out-of the box install, and if you don't follow up the advice given to you, yes, then Oracle is slow at updates.

Regards

Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA

To reply remove -verwijderdit from my e-mail address Received on Wed Jan 02 2002 - 11:45:17 CST