Re: Oracle vs. SQLServer

Harry Boswell wrote in message
<01bd836c$6f4150a0$3201c10a_at_hboswell.mdrs.state.ms.us>...
>I have worked with Oracle since 1985, except for the past 2 years.
>Now, I've got to set up a SQLServer database. <snipped>
> From a DBA standpoint, what do I most
>need to be aware of?

The good news:
Well, first you're going to have more time to surf and play on Kali. There's not much you can do to keep a mickey mouse database like SQL-Server fine-tuned and running smoothly. Running SQL-Server is like FTP'ing using UDP - send and pray.

The bad news:
 Once a a month you're going to have a nightmare trying to re-create all the indexes because SQL-Server keeps on screwing it up. The rest of your time will be spend on the phone to Microsoft support, arguing with them that, no you do not want to upgrade to the next version, all you want is a damn patch to stop the db engine from corrupting database pages (or whatever undocumented feature you stumble across). And when they finally do supply you a patch (after you have fought for it all the way up to CEO level), it is unsupported, not guaranteed to work and may cause some other undocumented features to come to light. Oh yes, I forget to mention by this time that the SQL-Server version your on is old anyway, and your boss finally managed to convince the bean counters to upgrade anyway.

Anyway, this has been my experience with SQL-Server 4.5 and 6.0... :-)

regards,
Billy
PS. I have a couple of phone numbers for "lossed-hair-restored" companies if you're interested. It may be very useful. Bald DBAs simply just do not look cool... Received on Thu May 21 1998 - 05:45:36 CDT