Re: Oracle vs SQL server

Personally this is how I feel about the Oracle/NT debate. Customer outgrows Oracle on a NT box. Get a Unix box (which does a better job then NT for app servers), and put Oracle on it. No matter what NT people say, NT is not created for HUGE database. I don't think the reliability is there. So with Oracle you have a choice of what OS you run on. With SQLServer, you have to stick with NT.

Don't get me wrong, I will always use NT for small to medium to even large DB. NT is easy to setup, and administrate. But I would never use SQL Server, because I like having a choice of what OS I want to run. I'm almost to the point of not using NT also. My Linux Oracle server so far rocks.

John

Masjid1 wrote:

> This is not an attempt to start a flame war. Or a mine is better contest. I was
> recently reading an article comparing the two databases and the author said
> both programs were good and that each could be used various situations
> interchangeably but the author said this is true in only 95% percent of the
> cases. My question is what area (mainly the 5%) is beyond SQL server's
> abilities. I apologise if this questions has been asked and answered. Thank you
> in advance
Received on Wed May 05 1999 - 21:29:32 CDT