Re: Sybase vs. Oracle
Date: 1995/09/10
Message-ID: <42uq2n$4qt_at_ibridge.iohk.com>#1/1
For my 2 cents, SYBASE C API supports asynchronous and multi-threaded program models, I don't believe that ORACLE OCI or PRO*C do. SYYBASE has a clustered index which physically locates the data with the lowest level index page. ORACLE only clusters multiple tables.
I think a lot of people jump on the row level locking issue and make a big deal of it, when you can always design your application to take that into account.
Bill Frauenhofer (bill_at_mosaix.bluebird.com) wrote:
: Craig Harper <caharper_at_hooked.net> wrote:
: >Mark Kyes <mkyes_at_access5.digex.net> wrote:
: >>Why would one choose oracle vs sybase? or vice versa are there any
: >>distinguishable differences that clearly make one better than the other?
: >>
: >For one the sybase system allow for dirty reads, whereas the Oracle
: >server does not.
: >2. The development cycle seems to be faster on the Oracle Platform than
: >the Sybase.
: We use ANSI SQL in this shop and basically just had to do a port from
: Informix to Oracle and Sybase. Oracle was definately faster to
: develop because it seemed to support the basic ANSI stuff in a more
: straight-forward manner. The original code was developed with
: DB/2 and SQL/DS and the SQL statements changed little for ORACLE.
: Bugs and differences just seemed to be less with Oracle.
: >3. The Sybase system seems to be faster at some functions than the
: >Oracle, but I have never timed them out.
: One of the known weaknesses in Sybase is the optimiser. Many of our
: SQL statements had to be recoded to accomadate Sybase. Oracle
: accepted the recoded statements without a gripe and nearly the same
: execution times.
: >4. I think that Oracle is more stable than Sybase. We have both and have
: >more problems with the Sybase system than our Oracle.
: I agree.
: 5. Sybase seems to be much easier to install and set-up than Oracle.
: 6. Scalability is significantly better on Oracle than on Sybase. (One
: of our customers on Oracle is running some very large tables that I
: know would produce unacceptable results on Sybase even with
: optimazations for Sybase.
: We are not using any non-portable features of any of these databases
: which may provide a level playing field but at the same time may
: play to the weakness in one implementation. (This is said with the
: understanding that some portable features require non-portable
: set-up within the code for things like SQLCA and SQLDA.....)
: There is also the question of database philosophy. Sybase is built
: with the intention of client/server and I think that in an "all on one
: box" situation may suffer because of this. Oracle on the other hand
: was designed with the "all on one box" philosophy and then had
: the client/server piece added on. This may mean that Oracle is
: optimised for the "all on one box" scenario but Sybase may beat it
: in the client/server mode. Just something to consider.
: Your mileage may vary.
: >Hope this helps.
: Hope this helps also.
: Bill
Received on Sun Sep 10 1995 - 00:00:00 CEST