Re: oracle vs. sql server

Barnes and Noble is using SQL serverr, yeah... and Amazon is using Oracle.
This doesn't tell anything.
'Objective' reasons:
- Using sqlserver will keep you stuck with NT. The scaleability of NT in itself is limited
( 4 processors max, 2 GB of RAM max)
- Using Oracle you have at least the option to switch to any Unix implementation.
- Personally I would rather go for Unix, because NT still doesn't have a proper shell language of it's own.
- Using ASP will again keep you stuck with Microsoft. I don't intend this is a flame against Microsoft. The simple fact is Microsoft software has always been a closed system, and only is being considered open, because of the number of different PCs it runs on.
I would choose something that is portable to another platform. If you really grow out of NT, don't setup distributed databases to divide and conquer, that's just making things worse. In other words: choose something that is truly open.

Hth,
Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA

<jinwoojoo_at_my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7mrl6d$qhv$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com...
> I'm an intermediate web programmer, and I've been charged with advising
> a group that wants a very scaleable database intensive web application.
> Although I get the sense that oracle is the industry standard,
> Microsoft claims that SQL 7 is a direct competitor.
>
> Can someone give me some non-dogmatic reasons to go wtih one or the
> other? Of course, scalability issues include the platforms that these
> databases run on.
>
> My preference at this point is to develop on SQL 7 because I like
> ASP/ADO tools that microsoft provides for web development. Ease of
> development, however, doesn't matter if the application will not be
> able to handle the load when it becomes a hit on the web. On the other
> hand, I've heard reports that Barnes and Noble uses SQL 7. This
> suggests that SQL 7 is capable. Any thoughts?
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>
Received on Sun Jul 18 1999 - 06:51:55 CDT