Re: Bye Oracle.

On 20 Nov 2002 13:33:06 -0800, norwoodthree_at_my-deja.com (NorwoodThree) wrote:

>That is a very good point...thats definately going to be one I bring
>up..
>
>Technically, are there any specific database maint. headaches with
>going to SQL Server such as maintaining partitioned tables and
>indexes? Any "gotchas"?

As someone who is very familliar with Microsoft SQL Server and just learning about Oracle, I have some input on this.

MS SQL Server:
Very easy to set up and administer. Very little control. Pretty bullet proof.

Oracle:
Very hard to set up and administer. Total control. Very bullet proof.

What this means is that, if you don't have the budget for full time DBAs, avoid Oracle like the plague, but if you do have experienced DBAs, they'll be easily able to take action to maintain and improve efficiency eith Oracle - not with MS SQL Server. Also, the more critical the database is, the more likely you'll want Oracle-specific features such as mirrored logs. OS or hardware level mirroring of volumes is not nearly as flexible and not as secure.

With regard to conversion, T-SQL procedure language is vastly different than PL/SQL, so all stored procedures and triggers will have to be rewritten. If you have a lot of those, It'll take time and money to reqrite them. Also, MS SQL Server has IDENTITY columns, but not sequences, so if you use sequences for something other than auto-numbering the keys in a single table, there's another conversion hurdle. Oh yeah, and if you use and OODB features, those will not translate at all. Received on Wed Nov 20 2002 - 15:49:51 CST