Re: Oracle vs SQL server

>> > 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
>

Sounds like a useful review !!!

I have no experience of SQLServer 7, but with 6.5... there are some problems. Here's a short list based on my few months experience with it

• if you redefine a view, stored procedures will access the old view until recompiled
• TSQL rarely indicates the location of synatx errors
• two hints are available compared to Oracle's 20+ (can't remember the exact number)
• if you rename a table using the GUI, bad things can happen to the data dictionary
• BCP (flat file export) places a blank line at the end of each file. This had had to be removed manually (no "sed" available on NT) before data transmission
• space allocation via the GUI doesn't always work and sometimes has no effect (no error, no effect, no nothing)
• when a TSQL program runs into an error situation (eg called procedure not available) it continues - committing the "transaction" and leaving the database in a potentially corrupted state
• there's no way of aborting from within TS procedure (that I know of), so if the program encounters an error N procedure calls deep, the only way to exit safely is to pass a failure flag back through each call - and to include messy handling logic
• there're no user defined functions available (I believe there're possible in v7)

IMHO, general consensus in the industry seems to be that SQL Server is not up to handling VLDBs (large databases) and data-warehousing operations. More specifically, I have serious doubts as to whether SQL Server can handle ad hoc or computer generated SQL as supplied by client analysis tools in decision support/warehousing situations.

Thing is, despite it's flaws and pitfalls (every few weeks I come accross a web page showing unandled SQL Server errors), SQL Server is probably easier to get started with than Oracle, and is simpler for GUI heads to administer. Sooo - I'd consider using it if I was a small company without a dedicated database and/or programming team (ie running a supplied app.) and if I wasn't a biased Oracle programmer.

     ; >

Regards,

Richard Gowan Received on Sun Jun 13 1999 - 08:34:01 CDT