How is Oracle Compared to MS SQL Server ?
-
If you know anything about this question, or you know the addresses of sites that report the comparisons between 2 DBMS, please tell me. I don't know if I should choose Oracle or MS SQl Server ? Thank you very much for your interest. :~ :~ :~ :~
-
If you know anything about this question, or you know the addresses of sites that report the comparisons between 2 DBMS, please tell me. I don't know if I should choose Oracle or MS SQl Server ? Thank you very much for your interest. :~ :~ :~ :~
-
If you know anything about this question, or you know the addresses of sites that report the comparisons between 2 DBMS, please tell me. I don't know if I should choose Oracle or MS SQl Server ? Thank you very much for your interest. :~ :~ :~ :~
I have used both, and don't see much difference as far as performance is concerned, but I have no formal tests to prove it. However, SQL Server is a lot easier to use and manage, you almost don't need a DBA, and it is cheaper, too (don't know the exact price either). Oracle, on the other hand, allows you to have database clients and servers running on unix platforms. If you don't want to be stuck with Windows, then choose Oracle. BTW, don't believe anyone who says Oracle or SQL Server is just crap. ;-)
-
If you know anything about this question, or you know the addresses of sites that report the comparisons between 2 DBMS, please tell me. I don't know if I should choose Oracle or MS SQl Server ? Thank you very much for your interest. :~ :~ :~ :~
Oye! The question that launched a thousand flamewars. I'm actively involved in both products as a DBA. The whole question is answerable usually by what you want to use the RDBMS for normally. 99% of the primary RDBMS features are present in both products. The implementations of those features are usually subtly different, but overall provide the same functionality. Oracle has a bunch of optional bolt on modules that SQL server doesn't have prebuilt but very few people use them except ni very special circumstances. Performance-wise, Oracle and SQL server will run about the same overall. Oracle has alot more flexibility in tuning the engine itself that SQLServer doesn't at this time. The performance equality will fall away though when you start scaling the system up. Eventually you will see diminishing return for hardware invested under the NT platform alot sooner than you do under UNIX. This is where Oracle starts pulling away. However this is usually when you start talking 8-16 proc sstems and databases in the terrabyte range. Oracle is more of a chore to manage but I've always had alot more success with applications based on Oracle than I have on SQL server. If youd'd like to post a better description of what you are trying to do, I'd be glad to take my best shot at helping you with some better information. Mark
-
If you know anything about this question, or you know the addresses of sites that report the comparisons between 2 DBMS, please tell me. I don't know if I should choose Oracle or MS SQl Server ? Thank you very much for your interest. :~ :~ :~ :~
I have an application (for my company)which runs on bothe Oracle and SQL Server. Under Oracle I actually use the OCI API and under SQL Server ODBC API. We needed to support oracle for marketing reasons only. Development and debugging was much more easy on SQL Server. On Oracle it was a big pain and it still is. Luckily most of our customers are opting for SQL Server. If you are developing only for Windows plaform and if it is ok for you to run database under Windows server don't even think about oracle. The mistakes made in this API make me realise that Microsoft has become big enough that it can shelter morons. If anyone working for me wrote anything this bad and tried to release it, I would kill them and display the body as a warning to the rest of the team. - Christian Graus about C# - GDI+
-
If you know anything about this question, or you know the addresses of sites that report the comparisons between 2 DBMS, please tell me. I don't know if I should choose Oracle or MS SQl Server ? Thank you very much for your interest. :~ :~ :~ :~
I agree with most of what has already been posted... - The capabilities of BOTH DBs fulfill the business needs of 99% of all projects - Oracle will scale better when used on a *NIX platform, and about the same under NT/2000 - The GUI interface for SQL is more intuitive than Oracle's The bigest factors in the decision making process are usually PRICE and the current skillsets within the organization. However unrealistic, if you want an indication of the "equality" between the two DB's when PRICE IS NOT A FACTOR (I know.. I know..) then www.tpc.org[^] might be of help. Note: Take the TPC numbers with a BIG grain of salt. The systems are multi-million dollar setups, with unlimited resources used to tune the system to the extreme. However, it does demonstrate the ultimate capabilities of database platforms (most often, it's used by SQL DBAs to taunt their Oracle/DB2 counterparts..) Mike Stanbrook mstanbrook@yahoo.com
-
If you know anything about this question, or you know the addresses of sites that report the comparisons between 2 DBMS, please tell me. I don't know if I should choose Oracle or MS SQl Server ? Thank you very much for your interest. :~ :~ :~ :~
Oracle is CRAP. I have, with ADO.NET and C#, written a better client tool in a week than comes with Oracle. Storing large records is a NIGHTMARE ( you need to chunk them in and you can't have trailing spaces, they get truncated ), etc, etc, etc. Christian No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer. - Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002 Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 Again, you can screw up a C/C++ program just as easily as a VB program. OK, maybe not as easily, but it's certainly doable. - Jamie Nordmeyer - 15-Nov-2002