a comparison of different databases

Hi,
I am going to restructure the informatic organization of an association. A part of the work requires the introduction of a Windows NT server that should contain administration and medical data. I think that at the beginning about 4-5 PCs clients will be used, while in the future more clients will be present and other two servers could be introduced in branch offices.

I need a SQL server to manage data. The candidates are the Oracle SQL server, the Sybase SQL and the Microsoft SQL server. I would know cons of your DBMS and/or references to where I can find information about this issue.
I have to consider the followings are facts:

1. The association is not big, so I think that the number of PC clients will never be larger than 20-30.
2. Simplicity to manage the database is an important issue. The association has not specialized people except for me and I am not sure that it will want spend too money for other people in the future.
3. I have no other computers except for DOS and WINDOWS PCs and I think the introduction of Unix is not likely. Further, I will rewrite all the (few) existing applications, so that, in practice, I start without any constrain due to existing software and Hardware.
4. Branch offices are small and will require only one or two Pcs. However, I cannot connect them by a dedicated phone line (too expensive). It would be useful a simple mechanism to replicate data and to syncronize the databases every night by a communtated phone call.

I have already collected some information on the question. I want to illustrate my opinion and my doubts till now. I hope this helps anybody who has similar problems. I will be also very grateful to anybody who will comment.

Microsoft SQL seems to be cheap and at the same time it should work well in an enviroment completely based on Microsoft operative systems. Microsoft SQL does not have row locking, but for some years I will not need it, because we have few client PCs. In the mean time, Microsoft will provide to resolve the problem (I hope). Microsoft SQL runs only on NT server, however NT is likely to replace DOS and WINDOS and to became very widespread so that the fact could not be a major drawback. A question is: is Microsoft effectively interested in to push SQL, to spend money to encrease functionalities of the server or will I have an old SQL server in few years ?

Oracle enterprise server is far more expensive. However, Oracle Workgroup server is competitive, even if it lacks of data replication. Further, I know that Oracle enterprise has a lot of more features, but what about Workgroup server with respect to Microsoft and Sybase servers? Further, a WEB server would be useful for me and the Oracle WEB server is very expensive. On the other hand Oracle products are more scalable. Further, Oracle is the leader of the market, it is very interested in spend money to mantain its position. This should be an assurance for the future.

Sybase offers two products: Sybase SQL server and Anywhere SQL server. The former is similar to Microsoft SQL server because they are both the result of the development of the old Sybase SQL server. However, there is Unix version for Sybase SQL. Anywhere come from Whatcom SQL and is a very simple DBMS which has the advantage of beeing able to run with very few memory and to support Windows 95, Windows 3.1 .... Pheraphs in my case, I could use Anywhere in branch offices and Sybase SQL in main office. Sybase products are cheap, expecially Anywhere. Of corse they lack of some feature with respect to Oracle, but what about Sybase SQL server with respect to Microsoft SQL server?

Thanks
Franco Received on Tue Jul 02 1996 - 00:00:00 CEST