RE: Please advice sql server vs. Oracle

From: Lex de Haan <lex.de.haan_at_naturaljoin.nl>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 15:42:42 +0200
Message-ID: <JFEEIGBIDOCCDALDIPLNKELNCBAA.lex.de.haan@naturaljoin.nl>

I think the first question should be: what are your requirements? there are too many differences between SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 10g ...

to name a few:
- SQL Server has locking reads -- so readers block writers and vice versa.

the read consistency model from Oracle is far superior
SQL Server has fixed block and extent sizes (8K and 64K)
SQL Server rows cannot span blocks: max row size 8K
SQL Server does not make a distinction between redo and undo, and stores both in a single log stream

kind regards,
Lex.

-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org]On Behalf Of Juan Cachito Reyes Pacheco
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 14:31
To: oracle-l_at_freelists.org
Subject: Please advice sql server vs. Oracle

Hi
I found some reasons to use Oracle instead sql server. Does any one know some paper that shows that differences, for example I know sql server don't have hot backup, but where there is a paper that show that.

:) Thanks

Juan Carlos Reyes Pacheco
OCP
Database 9.2 Standard Edition

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.

--
Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to:  oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Tue Mar 30 2004 - 07:40:17 CST