Re: DB Structure Oracle compared to SQL Server

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:01:07 -0800
Message-ID: <1171479666.416203@bubbleator.drizzle.com>

Robert Klemme wrote:
> 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.

It is!

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
www.psoug.org

Received on Wed Feb 14 2007 - 13:01:07 CST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: harvinder76_at_gmail.com: "Optimizer not using index on raw datatype column"
Previous message: samuelrollins_at_gmail.com: "Different user, different indexes used. Why?"
In reply to: Robert Klemme: "DB Structure Oracle compared to SQL Server (was: Re: Max size of SGA)"
Next in thread: euan.garden_at_gmail.com: "Re: DB Structure Oracle compared to SQL Server"
Reply: euan.garden_at_gmail.com: "Re: DB Structure Oracle compared to SQL Server"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US