Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle

Hugo Kornelis wrote:
- Oracle is more efficient. You have to spend less on hardware to get
the same performance.

I'd put a question mark here - at least for the general way you put it. It always depends on what you do with the tool. SQL Server's network protocol seems to be more efficient as it allows faster round trip. This can make a difference in applications that touch the DB frequently accessing only small data sets.

Kind regards

robert
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Fetching Data from 2 tables and send in text File using query
    ... File so what can be the query to do so. ... How to embed this in DTS is beyond me, ... Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP ...
    (comp.databases.ms-sqlserver)
  • Re: someone help
    ... "Hugo Kornelis" wrote: ... >>first time I am creating SPs.. ... That's not how SQL works. ... A few well-chosen rows of sample data, ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.clients)
  • Re: Log Invalidated after truncate table
    ... >Hugo Kornelis writes: ... >> Hi Erland, ... > * DUMP DATABASE ... On SQL 6.5 I should add. ...
    (comp.databases.ms-sqlserver)
  • Re: Backup log - will it truncate?
    ... Is this a SQL 2005 specific command? ... trouble-shooting on without disrupting the backup schema. ... Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP ...
    (comp.databases.ms-sqlserver)
  • Re: Triggers On System Tables
    ... "Hugo Kornelis" wrote: ... >>to implement this by creating triggers on the sysobjects table and inserting ... >>SQL DB? ...
    (microsoft.public.sqlserver.programming)