Re: Cross Post DATABASE QUESTION

From: CSC <jcheong_at_cooper.com.hk>
Date: 7 Jun 2003 13:21:07 GMT
Message-ID: <bbsos3$bgn4_at_imsp212.netvigator.com>

If price is the major concern, you should choose IBM DB2 Universal Database Express Edition V8.1 which is available now for 30% less than Microsoft SQLServer

http://www-3.ibm.com/software/data/info/db2express/pricing/

In comp.databases.sybase Carl Doan <carl-doan_at_cinci.rr.com> wrote:

> CSC wrote:
>> You can check the following web site to select the fastest database
>> 
>> http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results.asp
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> In comp.databases.sybase Kabir <sant_kabir_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 

>>>If you havent decided or are going to decide on Oracle,please read the
>>>Oracle facts at Brian Ceccarelli _at_ dbpowersuite.com.
>>>"Rob Verschoor" <rob_at_DO.NOT.SPAM.sypron.nl.REMOVE.THIS.DECOY> wrote in message news:<3edf0077$0$28909$1b62eedf_at_news.euronet.nl>...
>>>
>>>>"Rauf Sarwar" <rs_arwar_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:92eeeff0.0306042257.2e67e54e_at_posting.google.com...
>>>>
>>>>>"Ken Johnsen" <kjohnsen_at_si.rr.cccom> wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:<qmuDa.97959$h42.81954_at_twister.nyc.rr.com>...
>>>>
>>>>>>"KULJEET" <kuljeet_twtpl_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:febbed51.0306040517.71e25bf6_at_posting.google.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>PupppyWizzard_at_glay.org (Pupppy Wizzard) wrote in message
>>>>
>>>> news:<8dcf2300.0306040207.1aa53dcc_at_posting.google.com>...
>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hi. We are setting up a new database. We previously used MS
>>>>
>>>> Access,
>>>>
>>>>>>>>but we want something better.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>What would be a good choice for a company with 300 employees
>>>>
>>>> from:
>>>>
>>>>>>>>MS SQL SERVER
>>>>>>>>Oracle
>>>>>>>>Sybase
>>>>>>>>MySQL
>>>>>>>>Paradox
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>-Jer
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>choose oracle only.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>If you want "something better" then the best RDBMS out of the list
>>>>
>>>> is
>>>>
>>>>>Oracle. However, if you want to leverage your existing MS Access
>>>>>skillset and do not want to spend time and money to learn Oracle,
>>>>
>>>> then
>>>>
>>>>>go with SQL Server.
>>>>>
>>>>>Regards
>>>>>/Rauf Sarwar
>>>>
>>>>Oracle may be "better", but if you're looking for "someting really
>>>>good", choose Sybase ASE.
>>>>
>>>>HTH,
>>>>
>>>>Rob V.
>>>>rob_at_DO.NOT.SPAM.sypron.nl.REMOVE.THIS.DECOY
 

> Before you look at those numbers, realize that these systems are not 
> real-world.  I highly doubt a company/department of 300 can afford a 
> multi-million dollar system, let alone the professional services to tune it.
 
> Depending on what you have to work with and what you are planning to put 
>   on the database server, I would first look to Sybase or MSSQL.  With 
> those two, you have ease of administring, scalability ( up to several 
> TBs ), and lower cost of ownership.  At least with MS SQL, the learning 

> curve will be much lower. I have been working with MS SQL for over a > year, and I would not recommend it for "mission critical" systems yet.  

> If your organization is look towards terabytes of data, perhaps UDB, 
> which is maturing.  I have mixed reviews with UDB and it's cold backup 
> requirements ( same with Oracle ), but they both have proven track 
> records.  Oracle can  scale very well, but I think starting out with 
> Oracle can be counter productive unless you have that experience already 
> in-house and you have the cash to throw around.
 

> MySQL is a growing, but still niche db IMHO. It scales, but I am > assuming you would want full support, etc.

> Carl   Received on Sat Jun 07 2003 - 15:21:07 CEST