Difference Between Sql/Server and Oracle

Printable View

09-13-2004, 04:38 PM
natram

Difference Between Sql/Server and Oracle

Hello,

I would like to know the key difference between sql/server vs oracle.

thanks
nat
09-13-2004, 04:52 PM
slimdave
- Platform independence
- Scalability
- ... feel free to add more
09-13-2004, 05:30 PM
raghud

Did your Oganization wants evaluate both products ??

Search google .. You will find so many links for comparision.
09-13-2004, 10:13 PM
cruser3

This reminds me to post:
Any1 here administering both Oracle and Sql server as I may have to do the same i.e manage a couple of SQL server db's sometime in the near future and was wondering if I could get any pointers on getting upto speed.

:)
09-14-2004, 12:35 PM
adrianomp

My impressions, since I work with both:

SQL Server has some nice features like DTS and the SQL Server Agent, much easier to configure than Oracle.

However, when properly used Oracle is quite more powerful. It seems the approach on 10g is to make the DB as easy as MSSQL.

The better choice falls on the obvious considerations of scalability, costs and sizing.
09-15-2004, 04:22 AM
abhaysk

one thing on sql server i cant forget is "Locking mechanism sucks in MS Sql Server"

Abhay.
09-15-2004, 06:02 AM
dknight

concurrency control is not the same in SQL Server and oracle.
09-15-2004, 09:25 AM
gandolf989

Quote:

Originally posted by abhaysk
one thing on sql server i cant forget is "Locking mechanism sucks in MS Sql Server"

Abhay.

IMHO, in SQL Server 6.5 the locking mechanism was pathetic.
It has improved a lot since then.
09-15-2004, 09:29 AM
abhaysk

Quote:

Originally posted by gandolf989
IMHO, in SQL Server 6.5 the locking mechanism was pathetic.
It has improved a lot since then.

So was 7.x.. But 2000 is also no good ..

Abhay.
09-15-2004, 09:37 AM
gandolf989

Quote:

Originally posted by abhaysk
So was 7.x.. But 2000 is also no good ..

Abhay.

I once worked at a place that had a SQL Server 2000 cluster running with over 1,200 concurrent users pounding it all day, and SQL Server worked fine. Tha'ts not to day that I prefer SQL Server, instead I prefer Oracle for the number of things that I can do with it.
09-16-2004, 08:18 AM
bolero

So you say locking mechanism is very good in oracle???
Can two users update the same row in a table at the same time???
Try it.
09-16-2004, 08:34 AM
slimdave

Quote:

Originally posted by bolero
So you say locking mechanism is very good in oracle???
Can two users update the same row in a table at the same time???
Try it.

Are you saying that the SQLServer behaviour is better or worse in this respect, and how?
09-16-2004, 08:46 AM
pando

Quote:

Originally posted by bolero
So you say locking mechanism is very good in oracle???
Can two users update the same row in a table at the same time???
Try it.

do you think that´s logical and good :-?
09-16-2004, 09:21 AM
jodie

Quote:

Originally posted by cruser3
This reminds me to post:
Any1 here administering both Oracle and Sql server as I may have to do the same i.e manage a couple of SQL server db's sometime in the near future and was wondering if I could get any pointers on getting upto speed.

:)

Yeah - I'm in the same boat. We had a new app come in a couple months ago. It was an ugly mess and could run on either Oracle or SQLServer. We said to put it on SQL Server since my group doesn't support SQL Server. :) Now we are kicking ourselves. Thanks to Sarbanes Oxley, looks like we get the SQLServer and Informix stuff pretty soon. If we had known, we would have put it on Oracle in the first place because we at least have an Oracle DBA (me). Now we get to support SQLServer and Informix... while learning them at the same time.
09-16-2004, 01:16 PM
bolero

do you think that´s logical and good :-?

I reality it may occur.
09-16-2004, 01:23 PM
marist89

Quote:

Originally posted by bolero
do you think that´s logical and good :-?

I reality it may occur.

exactly. That's why oracle has locking.