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

As someone who's worked at BOTH Oracle and Microsoft on databases for over four years in each company, I must say that this response regarding SQL-Server and Windows NT is laughable.

If you don't believe that NT is scalable and reliable and a suitable database platform, then why do ORACLE sell more on NT than any other platform?

Why do all these .COM companies
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/productinfo/P58874.htm run SQL-Server on NT? I can also point you to (and have visited) major banks running critical real-time trading apps on SQL-Server, plus Power Stations, Country and City Elections (eg. the election for London Major most recently), plus quite a few hospital systems running care systems off Microsoft SQL-Server. You can't get much more critical when lives are at stake.

As for security, check-out this:
http://www.radium.ncsc.mil/tpep/epl/entries/TTAP-CSC-EPL-00-001.html The NSA just approved SQL-2000 C2 certification.Whilst you're there, take a look at the other vendors that have this stamp at http://www.radium.ncsc.mil/tpep/epl/entries/TTAP-CSC-EPL-00-001.html ... Where's Oracle8? (you've got 3 months to go before Oracle7's de-supported).

Reliability : if you look at the facts - Gartner did a very good assessment on reliability recently - you'll see that only 20% of downtime is due to O/S failures. Together with driver verification, system file protection and a whole host of other things in Win2K, people are running five 9's today. In fact, I've met customers who've been running on 3 nine's -- remember that's only EIGHT hours of downtime per year -- on NT4 quite happily. Most of this reliability comes down to people and process more than the software... and Win2K DataCentre Server covers these challenges off with things like the Microsoft Operations Framework, and 24x7xSingle-ownership of the problem between Microsoft and 3rd party vendor.

The other thing to remember is that Stratus, who do a large portion of the mission critical systems at airports are also selling old and new customers alike a truly fault-tolerant system for running SQL-Server and NT (they keep the CPU's in lockstep), you might want to check them out at http://www.stratus.com/

Sounds like the company who are contracted to do IT support either don't have the skills in SQL-Server, are handsomely charging a fortune for keeping Oracle up and running, or are need of some convincing. For all these occurrences, I'd encourage you to give MS a call - I'm sure they'd love to assist in helping out -- e.g.. proving it can, has and will do the job over Oracle at much lower initial and lower total cost.

The number's 0870 6010100 in England.

Best Regards.

>
> Second, SQL*Server does not provide the same level of security and
 recovery
> as Oracle.
>
> Third, scalability, compatibility, and expandability are much better with
> Oracle.
>
> Perhaps you should listen to the rationale of the company retained to
> support the systems. They may have lived through some experiences which
> lead them to the position they hold. I agree with them!
>
> Alex Stevens <alex_at_matrixinfotech.co.uk> wrote in message
> 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 Fri Sep 29 2000 - 04:24:55 CEST