Re: L:ist - Can do/do better in MS SQL than Oracle

Hi,

[Quoted] I have worked with both SQL Server and Oracle. I have not seen anything you can do with SQL Server that can't be done in Oracle. The only advantage of SQL Server is ease of management and configuration. It requires little attention most of the time, but the trade off here is flexibility. With all things taken into consideration, I still prefer Oracle to SQL Server. The main reasons are portability and scalability. And most of all we do not want to be locked into any single vendor.

Tony
www.w3base.com

"Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> wrote in message news:<3ca2e7b7$0$225$ed9e5944_at_reading.news.pipex.net>...
> My 2 cents (from an Oracle viewpoint)
>
> "sandiyan" <sandiyan_at_yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:69e9c64b.0203270941.5b05708e_at_posting.google.com...
> > I am been tasked to get a list:
> >
> > - that contain points that MS SQL will support but not Oracle...
> >
> > - that contain points that MS SQL will do better than Oracle...
> >
> > Points can be based on:
> > Operatability...(from a DBA point of view)
>
> MS Management tools and wizards are far in advance of those that Oracle
> offers. The plus side is that tis pretty much allows anyone to manage a DB,
> of course the downside is it pretty much allows anyone to manage a DB. On
> the other hand Oracle is highly,highly configurable in a way that SQL isn't.
> > Backup/Restore
>
> Oracle ships out of the box with a product that allows you to backup only
> changed blocks from datafiles (RMAN). As far as I know MS doesn't provide
> this level of functionality which will help massively on very large
> databases.
>
> > Transact vs PL SQL language
>
> pays your money you takes your choice. Oracle also supports java within the
> DB - the jury is out on how good an idea this is.
>
> > Cursors
> > Security
>
> Is almost always a configuration issue not a technology issue. Oracle is
> probably technically ahead and of course runs on platforms other than NT.
>
> > Instances/Clusters(Real Applicatin clusteres)
>
> Oracle runs well on decent high end clustered systems. MSSQL runs on NT
> clusters. Oracle clustered boxes are always contributing to the performance
> of the system. RAC looks a very very good product.
>
> > Performance
>
> is 80% down to good initial design. Most of the rest is then down to
> codeing. the fixes will be application specific. Bear in mind that in Oracle
> select statements will *never* wait for an insert/update to complete and
> vice versa. (unless you choose to so cripple them).
>
> > etc...
> >
> > I have got meeting with Oracle consultants and need some points so
> > that I can judge whether it is really worth moving to Oracle...
>
> It'll cost you :-(
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > NM
Received on Thu Mar 28 2002 - 21:52:44 CET