you missed one big thing:
WRITERS BLOCK READERS
Franklin wrote in message <2998139.1055493889_at_dbforums.com>...
>
>From this link:
>
>http://searchdatabase.techtarget.com/tip/1,289483,sid13_gci834319,00.ht-
>ml
>
>In SQL Server, the DBA has no "real" control over sorting and cache
>memory allocation. The memory allocation is decided only globally in the
>server properties memory folder, and that applies for ALL memory and not
>CACHING, SORTING, etc.
>
>
>In SQL Server, all pages (blocks) are always 8k and all extents are
>always 8 pages (64k). This means you have no way to specify larger
>extents to ensure contiguous space for large objects.
>
>
>In SQL Server, no range partitioning of large tables and indexes. In
>Oracle, a large 100 GB table can be seamlessly partitioned at the
>database level into range partitions. For example, an invoice table can
>be partitioned into monthly partitions. Such partitioned tables and
>partitioned indexes give performance and maintenance benefits and are
>transparent to the application.
>
>
>There is no partitioning in SQL Server.
>
>
>There are no bitmap indexes in SQL Server.
>
>
>There are no reverse key indexes in SQL Server.
>
>
>There are no function-based indexes in SQL Server.
>
>
>There is no star query optimization in SQL Server.
>
>--
>Posted via http://dbforums.com
Received on Fri Jun 13 2003 - 13:38:01 CDT
