Re: 90GB table on Windows 2000

"Daniel Morgan" <dmorgan_at_exesolutions.com> wrote in message news:3DA6F180.8DC6AADC_at_exesolutions.com...
> "Howard J. Rogers" wrote:
>
>[Snip]
> > Yup. Frankly, I'm getting bored with the "Micro$oft" and "Windoze" crap.
> >
> > My home server (2000) has been up for 221 days. It would have been
more,
> > but the previous 119 days were interrupted by a thunderstorm knocking
out
> > the power. One UPS later, and all is well. Even my XP desktop, which
gets
> > punishment aplenty and all manner of freeware installs, deinstalls and
> > anything in between, has been up for 54 days.
> >
> > This myth that Windows is unstable is just that: myth. These days. But
> > even so, I remember my NT4 servers at a large Insurance company running
for
> > three months at a time without interruption, except when I wanted to
bounce
> > them for service pack or backup issues.
> >
> > I blame the installers. Not the software.
> >
> > Regards
> > HJR
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Niall Litchfield
> > > Oracle DBA
> > > Audit Commission UK
> > > *****************************************
> > > Please include version and platform
> > > and SQL where applicable
> > > It makes life easier and increases the
> > > likelihood of a good answer
> > >
> > > ******************************************
> > >
> > >
>
> Great. Mine too.
>
> But then I'll bet you a burger and fries you didn't put 900GB of data an
it and
> open it up to many users attacking simultaneously with multiple tools.
>

Can I have a milkshake with that?

OK, it's not 900GB, but it is 300GB. And no, it's not multiple users attacking it simultaneously, but it is my other half who wouldn't know one end of a keyboard from a shoe-lace.

> Windows is a perfectly good O/S within certain parameters just as SQL
Server is
> a perfectly good database within certain parameters. And there are times
that a
> PostIt! Note is the right database too.

Actually, that last one is a classic, and I intend to steal it without remorse.

;-)

>But those parameters just don't happen
> to include terabytes of data and high hundreds to thousands of
simultaneous
> transactions from multiple users using multiple non-Microsoft tools.

Back in 1997, I was running 6 NT4 servers doing duty for 200+ people and with nearly a terabyte of data. (We were using DB2 at the time, too, but that's a different story!). I agree that pushing it that hard is taking it to the edge, but I hope you'd agree that the edge is quite a bit further away than the cheap anti-MS jibes tend to suggest.

Regards
HJR
> Daniel Morgan
>
Received on Fri Oct 11 2002 - 14:58:08 CDT