Re: Performance on NT: Oracle vs. SQLServer?
Date: 1997/03/27
Message-ID: <01bc3ae7$2374e110$03060101_at_hercules>#1/1
John T. McKay <jmckay_at_imnet.com> wrote in article
<3339419F.11DD_at_imnet.com>...
> doug a blaisdell wrote:
> >
> > Hi out there!
> >
> > We're trying to decide between Oracle and SQL server, for a DSS
database with
> > about 200 Meg of data now, but much larger soon (eg 1 Gig). We've got a
dual
> > processor with 128 Meg (but could increase this), running NT 4.0.
> >
> > I've heard that Oracle doesn't run as fast on NT, as on UNIX. Have any
of you
> > had experience with either/both, or know of performance benchmarks of
Oracle
> > vs. NT??
> >
> > Any help appreciated...
>
> I have used both Oracle and SQL Server on NT and have found SQL Server
> to be faster (in ways) but Oracle to be a bit more robust. You'll hear
> a lot of different advice with a question like this one. However, I
> would say it all depends on what you need. To me, SQL Server is like a
> Chevy pickup truck and Oracle is like a Freightliner. They are both
> built to carry loads. With the Freightliner, you can carry a bigger,
> heavier load, but you don't have the excelleration and maneuverability
> that you would with a smaller truck. It's just a matter of what you
> need your RDBMS to do and where you need it's strengths/weaknesses to
> be.
>
> Hope that helps,
>
> John
>
Received on Thu Mar 27 1997 - 00:00:00 CET