Re: MS SQL Server Evaluation

"Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> wrote in message news:<4051d5da$0$3307$ed9e5944_at_reading.news.pipex.net>...
> "Howard J. Rogers" <hjr_at_dizwell.com> wrote in message
> news:4051aecd$0$8354$afc38c87_at_news.optusnet.com.au...

I think you make a good point about RAC/Intel/Linux. That is where I see a near-term benefit.

In my view, Oracle is ahead of the curve here, and in 5 years when there will be a greater need to manage larger and larger datasets, Oracle will have a mature solution to address it.

Dave

> >
> > "Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield_at_audit-commission.gov.uk> wrote in message
> > news:4051a939$0$3307$ed9e5944_at_reading.news.pipex.net...
> > [snip]
> > >
> > > > However, almost all of the advanced features that are available in
> > > > Oracle, you won't find in SQL Server. Don't even look for anything
> > > > like RAC.
> > >
> > > *No-one* has anything like RAC. On the other hand even Mr Ellison at the
> > > launch of 10g spoke of having 'hundreds' of customers world wide on RAC.
> >
> > You sure he wasn't just talking about his yachts?
>
> LOL
>
> >
> > > Until this figure gets into the thousands I can't get myself over
> excited
> > > about it. In the meantime competive products run stable secure highly
> > > available apps for non-Oracle customers. Sure RAC is nice (especially if
> you
> > > run expensive RISC hardware) it isn't essential for most people.
> >
> > I couldn't agree with you more, Niall. RAC is over-hyped, and as a 'dead
> > sexy' technology, it's being adopted for a lot of wrong reasons. I flatter
> > myself that of all the RAC students I've had, about 80% have come away
> from
> > the three days saying 'Nah, RAC's not for us after all. Let's sign up for
> > the Data Guard course'. Which is the right response most of the time for
> > most of the people.
>
> Now I have seen a couple of cases from large companies (not us) where RAC
> was effectively free and allowed them to junk AIX or HPUX in favour of
> Linux/Intel cheap boxes. that would be a good argument that had nothing to
> do with performance or HA.
>
>
> > 'Course, if you truly need scale-up, speed-up AND high availability,
> there's
> > nothing to touch it... but the number of sites that genuinely need two of
> > the three are (I would say) vanishingly small.
> >
> > As for Grid, forget it. Unless your annual turnover is in excess of
> > $100million, I doubt you'll even think of it as an option for years and
> > years.
>
> Our annual turnover is in excess of GBP100m (or was last time I looked) -
> Std Edition does just fine. Of course with 10g I'll get RAC free with std
> edition....
Received on Fri Mar 12 2004 - 12:50:52 CST