Re: Oracle Vs. SQL Server on NT

As long as you are not using any advanced features such as advanced replication,
you could use Oracle workgroup server. Only costs $300 per concurrent user - a bargain
compared to SQL Server. SQL Server Enterprise would cost a lot more.

SQL Server 6.5 is way behind Oracle 7.x and Oracle 8 in most features. You will get minimal tech support from MS - they don't have any setup like Oracle (with bronze,silver and gold support options !)

You will get all the features of SQL Server, plus row-level locking. You are
right about horror stories with SQL Server, has only page-level locking.

Microsoft does not have any real thin-client strategy (unless I am wrong!).
Oracle tools will give you thin-client capability. Try Powerbuilder -also
very popular with Oracle.

Oracle's web application server works great and leverages the advantage of a shared pool and PL/SQL

Finally, Oracle on NT is very very easy to setup. One-step installation!!
Administration is easy with Enterprise Manager.

Also, if your db grows and you have to go to UNIX or any platform, you are always covered with Oracle. NT does have to be rebooted more often than almost any flavor of UNIX, although for your transaction volume, it should do OK.

Hope this helps

Raman Batra, DBA

Livia Squires wrote:
>
> I am in the early stages of designing a retail order processing system that
> will accept and process order requests from the internet, an in-house
> customer service department, and in batch mode from files received from a
> third party telemarketing company. The system will have to process credit
> card transactions. It will have to track inventory and integrate with
> accounting software that I have not yet selected.
>
> Within a year, the database could grow to be 5 gigabytes, and should
> be able to process 30,0000 transactions/day. I have a budget of about
> $500,000
> to build this system over the next year - that should pay for new servers,
> network components, purchase of about 40 additional workstations, a T1 line
> to the ISP, software, licenses, consulting fees, programmers, etc.
> (i.e.,pretty much everything).
> Our ISP is a business partner, so fortunately my budget does not have to
> pay
> for web development. The majority of people accessing the database server
> and
> working withing the company are will be fairly uneducated users in the
> customer
> service and accounting departments. For this reason I want to go to a thin
> client
> environment, except for the developers' workstations. I want to put most of
> the
> power into the servers. In all the literature I read from Microsoft, the
> examples they use all seem to describe my company's business model. This
> leads me to think I should go Microsoft all the way, especially since SQL
> Server is so much cheaper than Oracle. But I then I hear horror stories
> about SQL Server 6.5, and I hear SQL Server 7.0 won't be out until Q3 or
> Q4. But given my budget, I am worried about spending all my money on
> hardware, tools, and licenses, and having nothing left for development. My
> company is growing rapidly, and all evidence suggests that it
> will continue to grow over the next 5 years.
> Any comments?
> Please email me at
> livia_at_flashemail.com
> instead of here.
> THanks.
Received on Sat Mar 21 1998 - 00:00:00 CST