Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: Robert Klemme <bob.news@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:19:42 +0200
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.
- Prev by Date: Re: Are embedded views (Views within views...) evil and if so why?
- Next by Date: Re: Maximum number of records per second that can be inserted into SQLServer 2000.
- Previous by thread: Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- Next by thread: Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle