Re: Oracle VS SQL Server - Which is best to back end ?

From: Robert Vabo <robert.vabo_at_gecko.no>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 12:07:08 GMT
Message-ID: <Ml5t5.811$N4.283446_at_juliett.dax.net>


Use SQL Server (7 or 2000)
The documentation is very good. in oracle the documentation is poor. Not even the examples in the documentation work.

When writing eg. Procs it is much more easy to use SQLServer if you are going to use Dynamic SQL statements. Oracle is "heavy".

Answers on questions in the newsgroups comes much quicker in the SQLServer news groups.

Robert :-)
"Alex Stevens" <alex_at_matrixinfotech.co.uk> skrev i melding news:RO3t5.6084$pi.30098_at_NewsReader...
> I guess that this has probably been discussed before, but not in my
 lifetime
> on this group, so I'd appreciate any views that the group have as VB
> Developers.
>
> I've been asked to make a comparison between Oracle / SQLS for a
> specification we're writing for a system which is too great for Access,
> (poor network infrastructure on site). So the solution is for a
> client/server system.
>
> Point to note: The volumes of data will be too great for Access, but
> probably at the lower end of the scale for a true client/server back end
> database.
>
> The company contracted to support IT at the firm, will only support Oracle
> back-ends, and will not hear of SQL Server being installed. The main
 client
> however will listen to any argument for the use SQLS with VB.
>
> I would prefer to use SQL Server, as I always feel more at home with
> Microsoft products (Technet support, big on-line communities), by my
> knowledge of any comparison with Oracle is nil.
>
> I would appreciate any of your views regarding this dilemma.
>
> Many Thanks
>
> Alex Stevens, England
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tue Sep 05 2000 - 14:07:08 CEST

Original text of this message