DB Structure Oracle compared to SQL Server (was: Re: Max size of SGA)

On 14.02.2007 10:51, sybrandb wrote:
> What is the business case for 4 databases? Oracle != sqlserver, a
> *schema* in Oracle is a *database* in sqlserver. You don't need 4
> databases.

I am in doubt whether this is still true with SQL Server 2005. MS basically promoted their schema to be of more use and more like a "real" schema as in Oracle. I would say that SQL Server 2005 has one more layer than Oracle and not all map one to one (Object, Schema, Database, Instance vs. Object, Schema, Database) in Oracle. Although in practice you probably still end up using a database in SQL Server where you would use a schema in Oracle.

Things get a bit more difficult when considering physical structure: in SQL Server you definitively have separate physical entities (file groups and files) per database while in Oracle you basically have one pool of physical entities (table spaces and files) which you can freely associate with objects.

Apples and Oranges...

Regards

        robert Received on Wed Feb 14 2007 - 06:56:48 CST