Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid |
![]() |
![]() |
Home -> Community -> Mailing Lists -> Oracle-L -> RE: Limitations of MSSQL Server Vs. Oracle OR simply otherwise limitations in general - OT
Ian,
Correction, it's not "nearly impossible", it IS impossible.=20
Dick Goulet
Senior Oracle DBA
Oracle Certified 8i DBA
-----Original Message-----
From: MacGregor, Ian A. [mailto:ian_at_slac.stanford.edu]=20
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 10:32 AM
To: gogala_at_sbcglobal.net; BoivinP_at_mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca
Cc: chupit_at_gmail.com; vivek_sharma_at_infosys.com; ORACLE-L
Subject: RE: Limitations of MSSQL Server Vs. Oracle OR simply otherwise
limitations in general - OT
Microsoft has begun to remove support for other databases other than SQL
=3D
Server from some of its products such as Project Central. This is one
=3D
way of worming their way into shops. Identity management is another =
=3D
example. Once this is established, the data needs to be shared with =3D
other databases. This is easier if the other databases are also SQL =3D
SERVER.
Unless one works in a Windows-free environment, it is nearly impossible
=3D
to prevent the introduction of SQL Server. =3D20
Ian MacGregor
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
ian_at_slac.stanford.edu
-----Original Message-----
From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org =3D
[mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org] On Behalf Of Mladen Gogala
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 4:30 AM
To: BoivinP_at_mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca
Cc: 'chupit_at_gmail.com'; vivek_sharma_at_infosys.com; ORACLE-L
Subject: Re: Limitations of MSSQL Server Vs. Oracle OR simply otherwise
=3D
limitations in general - OT
There was an article discussed recently on comp.databases.oracle.server
which can be used for a decent management presentation, for the PHB and
=3D
=3D3D20
friends.
The article in question is full of gross factual inaccuracies, the most
=3D
=3D3D20
flagrant being the statement on page 12 that PCTINCREASE cannot be
defined for rollback segments, so rollback segments cannot grow. The =3D
=3D3D20
fact that despite not knowing a squat about oracle, the authors =3D3D20
concluded that oracle looks much better then SQL server only shows
how bad SQL server really is. I made some comments on =3D3D20
comp.databases.oracle.server, Howard Rogers vivisected the article in =
=3D
=3D3D20
detail and the general conclusion is that the article is bad, but SQL =
=3D
=3D3D20
server is worse. I cannot fathom why do people expect the company that
has created such a peace of s....oftware as Windows to create a good
database software?
After the usual dose of rant about MicroS*t, the article is well =3D3D20
written and makes oracle look much better then MS-SQL Server. It =
=3D3D20
actually reveals the ugly truth: Oracle and SQL Server do not play in =
=3D
=3D3D20
the same league. You cannot compare little league teams to the Yanks =3D
=3D3D20
(if someone mentions things like the curse and some garments from NE, =
=3D
=3D3D20
I'll get seriously angry).
On 11/24/2004 07:04:50 AM, Boivin, Patrice J wrote:
> One thing comes to mind... SQL Server 2005 is not out yet, it's still
> in
> Developer Preview isn't it?
>=3D3D20
>=3D3D20
>=3D3D20 >=3D3D20 >=3D3D20
>=3D3D20 >=3D3D20
>=3D3D20
>=3D3D20
>=3D3D20 >=3D3D20
--=3D3D20
Mladen Gogala
Oracle DBA
-- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l -- http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-lReceived on Sun Nov 28 2004 - 10:07:16 CST
![]() |
![]() |