Re: Oracle VS SQL Server - Which is best to back end ?

Maybe you don't need such configuration, but the following article (I must say it comes from winNT magazine...) can give you some point of view of the ongoing development of SQLserver:

2. ========== HOT OFF THE PRESS ========== (contributed by Paul Thurrott, thurrott_at_win2000mag.com)

• SQL SERVER SHATTERS PERFORMANCE RECORDS One detail that came out of Bill Gates' keynote address during the Windows 2000 (Win2K) launch was the announcement that Microsoft's upcoming SQL Server 2000 product had just set the world record in the industry-standard TPC-C benchmark, which measures database server performance. SQL Server 2000 set the new record on a 12-system Compaq configuration running Win2K. Previous to the Win2K/SQL Server 2000 tandem, the record holder was Oracle 8i running on a 96-processor clustered Solaris system, which scored 135,815 tpmC. Using SQL Server 2000, Windows 2000 Advanced Server (Win2K AS), and 12 8-processor Compaq ProLiant servers, Compaq and Microsoft scored 227,079 tpmC, which is a whopping 68 percent improvement over the prior record. This score represents a volume 575 times larger than the combined transaction volumes of Amazon.com and eBay. For more information, go to http://www.wininformant.com/display.asp?ID=2582.

Best regards
Uri, ISRAEL

"Alex Stevens" <alex_at_matrixinfotech.co.uk> wrote in message news:RO3t5.6084$pi.30098_at_NewsReader...
> I guess that this has probably been discussed before, but not in my
 lifetime
> on this group, so I'd appreciate any views that the group have as VB
> Developers.
>
> I've been asked to make a comparison between Oracle / SQLS for a
> specification we're writing for a system which is too great for Access,
> (poor network infrastructure on site). So the solution is for a
> client/server system.
>
> Point to note: The volumes of data will be too great for Access, but
> probably at the lower end of the scale for a true client/server back end
> database.
>
> The company contracted to support IT at the firm, will only support Oracle
> back-ends, and will not hear of SQL Server being installed. The main
 client
> however will listen to any argument for the use SQLS with VB.
>
> I would prefer to use SQL Server, as I always feel more at home with
> Microsoft products (Technet support, big on-line communities), by my
> knowledge of any comparison with Oracle is nil.
>
> I would appreciate any of your views regarding this dilemma.
>
> Many Thanks
>
> Alex Stevens, England
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tue Sep 05 2000 - 15:49:54 CEST