Re: Re : Losing out to SQL Server

From: Jared Still <jkstill_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 09:44:09 -0800
Message-ID: <CAORjz=OR0+S6tUbB=LWuQVmHPa5=-hy9erjcA=kW2eHLSL_bBw_at_mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 7:31 AM, David Barbour <david.barbour1_at_gmail.com>wrote:
> " In SQL Server, a table is basically a big linked-list and the data blocks
> are essentially the leaf-blocks of the cluster index. Those blocks are then
> doubly-linked back and forth so you can traverse the table in a full table
> scan or in an index range scan. In fact, an index range scan of the whole
> table is essentially (physically) the same as a full table scan. I'm not
> sure exactly why, but SQL Server has always had trouble with corruption of
> these link-list pointers. Run DBCC to check (and fix) problems with these
> pointers. No comparable issue exists within Oracle."
>

I don't know the technical reason for this issue, but if you were around when
MS "partnered" with Sybase you probably know why.

Sybase has always had this issue, and SQL Server is modeled after Sybase.

Of course the partnership was dissolved when MS learned all they wanted from Sybase.

Jared Still
Certifiable Oracle DBA and Part Time Perl Evangelist Oracle Blog: http://jkstill.blogspot.com Home Page: http://jaredstill.com

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l

Received on Thu Feb 28 2013 - 18:44:09 CET