Re: PHP Developer ::: 4 years +IBM FL +IBM Duration 7 month

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 22:38:15 +100, Noons wrote:

+AD4 Same here. I could not believe when only 6 Oracle folks showed up+ACE
+AD4 Fortunately, we quickly made up the numbers with the MSSQL guys who
+AD4 apparently use a shirty product but know their RDBMS history better than
+AD4 any others.

[Quoted] I would not call SQL Server a shitty product. As a matter of fact, it has almost caught up with Oracle, technology-wise. It has decent partitioning, parallel query, row level locking and in-memory [Quoted] possibilities, just like Oracle. T-SQL is lousy, when compared with PL/ SQL and I think that Microsoft would do well to take a page out of the IBM's playbook and implement PL/SQL in SQL Server. Once MS puts it on Linux, it will probably be a major competitor to Oracle. Unfortunately, MS is late with that. They have promised MS SQL on Linux for June 2017, but it's still only a preview:

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server/sql-server-2017

Yes, SQL Server doesn't have multi-versioning, which means that readers do block writers and vice versa, but the impact of that is not as great as one would think. There are some things with SQL Server which I don't like, like +ACI-SKIP LOCKED+ACI option in the select statement. That can produce inaccurate reports. I've seen a developer who did it to +ACI-speed up the report+ACI. Fortunately, the accounting has caught the error, as it was a financial report, so the application was un-speeded. On the other hand, I've also seen PRAGMA AUTONOMOUS+AF8-TRANSACTION badly misused, as well as the infamous WHEN OTHERS THEN NULL, which I call +ACI-a kytean expression+ACI. Bottom line is that SQL Server is not better than Oracle, but is good enough for most applications and is much, much cheaper. [Quoted] Long story short, the future will be interesting.

-- 
Mladen Gogala
The Oracle Whisperer
http://mgogala.byethost5.com