Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: "Tony Rogerson" <tonyrogerson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 08:54:17 +0100
Given that you live in a Windows only world your defense of the one
and only operating system SQL Server runs on seems a bit disingenuous.
That 'rant' has nothing to do with the fact you chose the desktop version of
windows aka Windows XP to do your benchmark (as you have stated), my point
all along has been your benchmark is floored and obviously your knowledge
and understanding of the windows platform - I would hope that if you have
any clients outside of the classroom you don't suggest they run their
production databases on Windows XP, unless the database is required for a
single user / application, for instance a on the road salesman who stores
info locally and replicates back into the central database - which would
run, not on XP but Server editions!
I routinely work with
Windows, several flavors of Linux, Solaris, HP/UX, and AIX. It matters
to an Oracle architect which o/s is used
Perhaps thats what your problem is - knowledge of many, expert in none.
have a choice of Windows or Windows. Congratulations on being able to
make that choice. Which vendor ... oh lets use Microsoft. What should
we benchmark it against? Microsoft again. And the winner is ... drum
roll please ... Microsoft Windows.
So long as it does what it says on the tin and is able to give my client a
business solution then it works for me (and my client).
--
Tony Rogerson
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlserverfaq.com - free video tutorials
"DA Morgan" <damorgan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1145225400.866564@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Tony Rogerson wrote:
If there was any technical merit in your argument you would point at an
article that explained the differences between XP Pro and the windows
server family.
Given that you live in a Windows only world your defense of the one
and only operating system SQL Server runs on seems a bit disingenuous.
Oracle runs on 19 separate operating systems and I routinely work with
Windows, several flavors of Linux, Solaris, HP/UX, and AIX. It matters
to an Oracle architect which o/s is used ... you, on the other hand,
have a choice of Windows or Windows. Congratulations on being able to
make that choice. Which vendor ... oh lets use Microsoft. What should
we benchmark it against? Microsoft again. And the winner is ... drum
roll please ... Microsoft Windows.
The TPC benchmark seems to have fallen on deaf ears
The ears aren't deaf? Every once in awhile we need a good laugh.
Disclaimer: I am sending this email from a Windows machine and have ton
of Microsoft products here at the U. Heck I used to teach in Mary Gates
Hall and now teach in the Paul Allen Computing Center. But give the
hyperbole a break every once in awhile. There are other competent
companies.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(replace x with u to respond)
.
- References:
- SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: Paul
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: Hugo Kornelis
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: Robert Klemme
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: DA Morgan
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: Tony Rogerson
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: DA Morgan
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: Tony Rogerson
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: DA Morgan
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: Greg D. Moore \(Strider\)
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: DA Morgan
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: Tony Rogerson
- Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- From: DA Morgan
- SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- Prev by Date: Re: Query/View: The 2 newest periods for each indicator
- Next by Date: Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- Previous by thread: Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- Next by thread: Re: SQL Server 2005 vs Oracle
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|