Xref: alice comp.databases.oracle.server:20238
Path: alice!news-feed.fnsi.net!news.idt.net!newshub.northeast.verio.net!newsfeed.gte.net!news.gte.net!not-for-mail
From: JRStern@gte.net (JRStern)
Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle.server
Subject: Re: Oracle ODBC performance SUCKS!@
Date: Tue, 05 May 1998 05:49:41 GMT
Organization: gte.net
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <6im975$ghc$4@gte2.gte.net>
References: <354a4cf3.0@news.webt.com>
X-Auth: DC9B9ECD52474A4748C30414
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230

On Fri, 1 May 1998 18:32:42 -0400, "bubba" <brittonb@webt.com> wrote:
>Two identical tables: one in MS SQL Server, the Other in Oracle 8 NT.
>(NT Server 4.0 SP3, 96 MB RAM, PII 266, SCSI Wide 4-g. Stripped system of no
>other extraneous applications, processes.)

I'm new to Oracle, too, but watch out that you have your "tuning"
parameters set right.  Out of the box, Oracle can really suck,
apparently, but can be fixed and do quite well, if you know the magic
words.  This is not needed at all in Access, of course, and is needed
to a far lesser extent with SQLServer.

Joshua Stern
JRStern@gte.net