Re: Oracle versus SQLServer - Pro & Cons

In article <88u7i6$ej$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com>, markp7832_at_my-deja.com says...
> In article <88tsug$orp$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Bernard Polarski <bpolarsk_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Does SQL Server run under Linux ?
> >
> > B. Polarski
> >
> > In article <38B21574.495381E8_at_attglobal.net>,
> > bvkane_at_attglobal.net wrote:
> > > Oracle versus SQLServer - Pro & Cons
> > >
> > > Which would be a better database? Why? Looking for opinions. Help
> > > appreciated.
> >
> Which rdbms database product is best, depends on your needs. MS-Server
> is realitively cheap but it only runs on NT. Oracle is available on
> UNIX, a big plus in my opinion, as well as VMS, MVS, and NT.
>
> Oracle scales from a few users to 1000's of users and from a few
> hundred megabytes to terrabytes.

This is Oracle's greatest advantage, but very few projects get into the area beyond SQL Server's abilities but within Oracle's.

> Oracle has solid backup and recovery procedures and functionality.

So does SQL Server.

> There are a lot of third party products for application development and
> reporting, and system monitoring tailored to Oracle available.

There are many for SQL Server as well. Received on Tue Feb 22 2000 - 11:15:10 CST