FUD. Oracle does not have the corruption problems that Sybase had. I've
been working with Oracle for over a decade and worked with hundreds of
clients running thousands of instances over many years and only come across
corruption 2 times. Both times at the same site and it was a bad disk
controller. Bad disk controller is NOT RDBMS specific.
Jim
--
Replace part of the email address: kennedy-down_with_spammers_at_attbi.com
with family. Remove the negative part, keep the minus sign. You can figure
it out.
"CS" <sheley_at_interaccess.com> wrote in message
news:fZn9a.5615$fa.2433810_at_dca1-nnrp1.news.algx.net...
> We support 100 companies nation wide and of those, 5 have Oracle and the
> rest MSSQL. They are all running on NT
>
> Recent upgrades to our product with implementation, cost run 2x higher on
> Oracle than MSSQL
>
> Oracle seems to be an essay test instead of pick and choose.
>
> Clients seem to report more downtime with oracle due to corruption. I
won't
> swear to it but it seems that way.
>
> hth
> CS
>
>
> "dmz17" <dmz17_at_nospam.nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:pan.2003.03.04.21.10.38.874474_at_nospam.nowhere.com...
> > On Mon, 03 Mar 2003 15:15:20 +0000, Phil wrote:
> >
> > > Looking for a completed evaluation comparing Oracle with MS SQL
Server.
> Any
> > > ideas?
> >
> > I am afraid you will have to figure out your needs and how they would be
> > filled by any particular vendor for yourself.
> >
> > Go to Oracle's website and look, then go to Microsofts.
> >
> > Pick the vendor who appears less arrogant.
> >
> > This may be the hardest task.
> >
> > All else being equal, any modern RDBMS will do the job. The rest is
> > marketing.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > dmz17
>
>
Received on Wed Mar 05 2003 - 09:46:59 CST
