Re: Oracle licence question

What level of ANSI 92 or didn't you know there are different levels? That
is the version not the level. SS isn't completely ANSI 92 compliant at
all
levels. (no one is)
Jim

Ok, it has ENTRY, INTERMEDIATE and FULL compliance to FIPS 127-2
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/tsqlref/ts_set-set_86ya.asp)
which is based on ANSI 92.

So, I guess let me rephrase the question - does Oracle have ENTRY,
INTERMEDIATE and FULL compliance to FIPS 127-2 because I can only find
references to ENTRY level.

But to reiterate the original point - a good database professional will,
given a problem try and code it to FIPS 127-2 FULL (ANSI 92) and if it
doesn't perform well enough will then look at vendor extensions. If you are
writing an application that needs to run on SQL Server, Oracle and DB2 then
you need to write portable SQL, that seems to be lost on HansF and probably
DA too.

--
Tony Rogerson
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlserverfaq.com - free video tutorials


"Jim Kennedy" <jim dot scuba dot kennedy at gee male dot com> wrote in
message news:nM6dnTjgnbcrQpzZRVn-jQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Tony Rogerson" <tonyrogerson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dtrpo7$bkl$1$8302bc10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
What level is ANSI SQL compliance does Microsoft claim - can you
provide
a
citation ?

ANSI 92 - check Books Online.
What level of ANSI 92 or didn't you know there are different levels? That
is the version not the level. SS isn't completely ANSI 92 compliant at
all
levels. (no one is)
Jim

Here's the published current salary costs of both sets of DBA's in the
UK
Oracle - http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/oracle.do
SQL Server - http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/sql%20server%20dba.do

There shows that there is less than a 3-13% differential between the
min
and max salary ranges. Hardly a lot higher at all.


Very clever Mark, but I think you really want to compare like for like,
so
you ought to compare Oracle DBA with SQL Server DBA (like for like) and
you
get a more accurate result, if you compare 'oracle' with 'sql server' its
even worse....

DBA...
Oracle Min/Max £40,073 £45,219

SQL Server Min/Max £36,128 £40,846


Just search on product...
Oracle £39,363 £46,026

SQL Server Min/Max £33,665 £38,797


Thats a big difference!

http://www.theedison.com/research/gems/040401rdbmscmcs.pdf

I wonder who has commissioned the report? Looking at the detailed tasks
it
starts to get a bit interesting and bias toward Oracle starts to be
shown,
for instance; the set up and seperate service pack installation - counted
as
one and not broken down - mmmm.

I await the next report with interested and will also look for more bias,
perhaps I will download your trial and try it for myself and write up the
results as a whitepaper of my own!

Perhaps the savings the state are offset against the fact that SQL Server
salaries are around 18-20% lower than that of Oracle - quoting your
source
too!

--
Tony Rogerson
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlserverfaq.com - free video tutorials


"Mark Townsend" <markbtownsend@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4400F6C5.8080203@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


What you mean - they use portable SQL as definied by the ANSI SQL
standard, something Oracle doesn't do very well! Come on guys, catch
up!!
Talk about MS locking people in - LOL!

What level is ANSI SQL compliance does Microsoft claim - can you
provide
a
citation ?

One thing you need to watch is staffing, costs for Oracle staff here
in
the UK are a lot higher than SQL Server ones, also, you tend to need
more; also, the SQL Server professional has a more rounded experience
to
the business, often trained in Business Intelligence.

Here's the published current salary costs of both sets of DBA's in the
UK
Oracle - http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/oracle.do
SQL Server - http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/sql%20server%20dba.do

There shows that there is less than a 3-13% differential between the
min
and max salary ranges. Hardly a lot higher at all.

There is no evidence to suggest that managing Oracle requires anymore
DBA's than managing SQL Server. Overall DBA counts within an
organization
are not comparable, as typically the Oracle DBA's are looking after
more
mission critical systems, and/or larger Data Warehouses, than the SQL
Server counterparts. These systems also often have higher SLA
requirements, which can translate into more than one shift of DBAs.

And there is evidence to suggest that managing Oracle is actually
esaier
than managing SQL Server. See the Edison report that showed that Oracle
Database 10g requires 30% less DBA time, 20% less steps, and up to
$36,000
less per year to manage than SQLServer 2000

http://www.theedison.com/research/gems/040401rdbmscmcs.pdf

I believe that a new Edison report is due out soon comparing Oracle
Database 10g to SQLServer 2005. But if the last eweek review is
anything
to go by, the difference may become even greater with the newest
release
of SQL Server

"However, by making management more complex, Microsoft has discarded
the
one significant advantage it had over Oracle Database 10g and IBM's
DB2-ease of administration. This makes DB2 and Oracle Database 10g look
all the more attractive for their broader choice of development
frameworks, management interfaces, and server hardware and operating
systems."

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1894609,00.asp

Your last comment, which interesting enough is not the usual MS
rhetoric
is purely subjective, and you have no evidence to back this statement
up
at all.






.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Oracle licence question
    ... I did and I couldn't find the citation, which is why I asked you for it. ... I want to check what level of ANSI compliance MS claims, to validate your claim that their implementation of SQL is somehow more the ANSI standard compliant than Oracle's. ... Oracle - http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/oracle.do ... SQL Server - http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/sql%20server%20dba.do ...
    (comp.databases.oracle.server)
  • Re: Oracle licence question
    ... What level of ANSI 92 or didn't you know there are different levels? ... SQL Server - http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/sql%20server%20dba.do ... you ought to compare Oracle DBA with SQL Server DBA and ... starts to get a bit interesting and bias toward Oracle starts to be shown, ...
    (comp.databases.oracle.server)
  • Re: Oracle licence question
    ... Oracle - http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/oracle.do ... SQL Server - http://www.itjobswatch.co.uk/jobs/uk/sql%20server%20dba.do ... Very clever Mark, but I think you really want to compare like for like, so ... What you mean - they use portable SQL as definied by the ANSI SQL ...
    (comp.databases.oracle.server)
  • Re: Oracle licence question
    ... SS isn't completely ANSI 92 compliant at all ... The presence of a FIPS flagger does not indicate that the product itself is compliant with these levels - just that the product will tell you when you use a feature that is not compliant to one or more of the different levels. ... INTERMEDIATE and FULL compliance to FIPS 127-2 because I can only find references to ENTRY level. ... If you are writing an application that needs to run on SQL Server, Oracle and DB2 then you need to write portable SQL, that seems to be lost on HansF and probably DA too. ...
    (comp.databases.oracle.server)
  • Re: IOT, memory and transaction time
    ... easily generate it with DBMS_METADATA.GET_DDL if your verison of Oracle ... were pretty consistent no matter how big the table (this transaction ... FOREIGN KEY (versionNo) REFERENCES T_TRANSACTIONS, ... Oracle provides read consistency and SQL Server ...
    (comp.databases.oracle.misc)