Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Database or store to handle 30 Mb/sec and 40,000 inserts/sec

Re: Database or store to handle 30 Mb/sec and 40,000 inserts/sec

From: Double Echo <doubleecho_at_your.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 20:06:31 -0500
Message-ID: <pU7Lf.6805$Ts6.4283@fe24.usenetserver.com>


Galen Boyer wrote:
> Oh my god! You just don't get it. SQLServer still supports read
> uncommitted correct? Why? If it has an implementation that doesn't
> need to make people choose that inferior path, as opposed to read
> committed, then, why is this path not the default path?
>
> That question alone is enough to know that this implementation is not
> performant enough, so it has to keep the old, inferior implementation
> around.
>

Even if SQL-Server is 'inferior', why does it matter? Oracle has its own set of 'inferior' attributes, but that's not really what's important.

"Technical Superiority" was never a requirement for software marketing or software sales. Some of the best technology available died in the marketplace simply because the products were never sold properly. Oracle has a tremendous marketing machine, same for MS-SQL, but rarely do you ever hear 'technical superiority' used to sell their products. You see flame wars at the tech level, but management at large could care less about what product or the other is better, it really doesn't matter.

Instead you see MS, Oracle, and IBM sell peace of mind--to managers. At the technical level if the product meets requirements of the business the product from a management standpoint is not 'inferior' it is simply 'acceptable'.

If a business chooses to use SQL-Server, and they like using it, and it meets management performance then who cares! In fact, it is management that sets the pace, if they want more, they certainly know where to buy better products--or products that perform more to new or changing requirements.

The real truth for technical people is to understand business requirements, and provide the technical support that the company wants. In today's market many shops are forced to buy one db or another, and at the management level it really doesn't matter, just make sure the system can be supported.

> Please explain why read uncommitted is still supported by MS when it now
> has an implementation that supports read committed?
>
Received on Wed Feb 22 2006 - 19:06:31 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US