Re: Oracle comparison

Generic Poster <nospam_at_nospam.com> wrote in message news:<3D0FFDBA.21B80597_at_nospam.com>...
> Ryan wrote:
> >
> > It sounds like your programmers are the classic 'jacks of all trades'.
>
> I am starting to think so myself. We have only done some ASP work so
> far and that went ok but I am not sure......
>
> > People like that are dangerous. They know just enough to make you think they
> > know alot about alot of things, but not enough to really do any of them
> > quite well.
>
> I do worry about this....
>
> They often think they can...
>
> Yes, one fellow especially thinks he can do anything and often oversells
> himself.
>
> which causes alot of problems.
>
> He already has. :)
> >
> > Is it in your budget to find an independent DB consulting company that has
> > people with experience in multiple platforms to come in and give you a
> > cost/benefit analysis?
>
> Well, the client would have to pay for that, you know. We bill all this
> stuff straight on back. We really don't take on expenses like that on
> our own.
>
> Oracle is very good, but its very expensive. The
> > Oracle people you have to hire are also more expensive than people who do
> > other databases. ITs
>
> ?
>

To do a good job with Oracle you need alot more time/effort invested to learn it than with other databases. This translates into higher salaries for us(oracle professionals) and more expenses for you. If your not doing anything complex you might be able to get lower payed people to implement something similiar in quality in another database. Senior Oracle DBAs run $150k+ and Senior DBAs on othe platforms are alot cheaper....  

> also more complex so if you don't get the right people
> > you have problems...
> >
> > I know consultants can be expensive, but the economy is slow and you might
> > be able to negotiate a deal.
>
> Well, I am starting to get an interesting picture here. That my
> programmer with Oracle experience may not have enough to experience to
> do a really good job. That all these db's are not just "dialects of SQL
> and if you know one, you know them all", which is what I was told. Thx
> for the advice.
>
> Sure, if the client (or any client) wanted to go Oracle, I would love to
> hire an Oracle expert (beginning to sound like that is what it takes).
> Just not sure if anyone would want to work for my wages, would be $40-45
> per hour US. I have no idea if that is a good rate for an experienced
> Oracle programmer.
> >
> > A few points... yes SQL is open source
>
> MySQL? PostgreSQL?

SQL itself was created by IBM in the 1970s?(I think). It is open source. Similiar to Unix. Each database implements its own versions of it. There is a SQL standards committee that recommends what should be included. None of the databases implement this wholely. I believe the last standards are the 1999 ones and I think Oracle is the only one to implement most of these. I would assume that the other commercial databases will implement them in their own way in coming releases.

MySQL and PostgreSQL are the names of the database platforms. They implement the opensource SQL in their own way. However, there is alot more to a database than just learning SQL...

>
> but it is implemented differently in
> > different databases.
>
> It looks like MySQL is lacking in a # of ways.
>
> I have seen quite a few questions on here from former
> > SQL Server
>
> MS SQL Server?

Yes MS SQL Server.

>
> people on how to do the same thing in Oracle. People often fall
> > into the trap of wanting to make everything cross platform...
>
> Huh? No, the thing we were worried about was this. It really looked
> like PostgreSQL could do this job nicely. But at some point in the
> future, if the client got really big, he may want to go to a commercial
> db. And the question was, how easy would it be to migrate the Postgres
> stuff to a commercial db? You know?
>
> problem is you
> > dont take advantage of any of the best features in any of the tools so you
> > end up with a mediocre application that is wonderfully portable.
>
> Huh? But Oracle is totally cross-platform. Our point was, we like the
> idea of designing a db that can move with the OS, if the OS is changed.
> That is cross-platform.

As part of this response, unless you get a specialized expert on one of the databses on your development staff, its unlikely that they will be able to take advantages of the most important features and your application will be mediocre.

> >
> > BTW, who and what URL is running a 4TB database with open source?
>
> No one, I guess. That was simply a weird figure that came out of an
> article. The article suggested that at a 4 TB db, most open source db's
> fall down and you really need to go commercial. :)
>

Where is the article? Id like to read it. Sounds interesting. I find learning about other DB platforms improves my knowledge of Oracle since I can see the differences.

> I have to
> > see it to believe it. What kind of concurrency load do they have? Do they
> > have complex business rules? Just curious... I hear these kinds of things
> > thrown around sometimes and would like to check them out to satisfy my
> > curiousity.
>
> No, you just misunderstood, man. :)
>
> Thx for your comments.
>
> <snip>
Received on Wed Jun 19 2002 - 06:18:33 CDT