Re: Import problems on Windows Server

I've been on every version from whatever it was when the IBM PC first
came out to XP. Each time I try to give it a fair try. Each time it
bitch-slaps me. I use XP 8-12 hours a day. I'm not happy about it.
I'm glad most of the work is just using X or browsers to get to real
servers. I have no choice about mail and app clients and OS at
customers.

XP is fine, so is Vista, like you I use them day in day out, around 12 hours a day myself too - laptops and the desktop i'm writing this on.

Most of the problems are not MS at all, they are down to poorly written drivers, bad network setups, poor Active Directory performance, admins writing scripts and locking stuff down to the point the start screwing up the OS, old hardware etc...

I use SQL Server on XP and Vista for writing and demo'ing stuff, I get no problems doing this, and I push the cpu, disks etc...

Because I'm 100% SQL Server and 100% consultancy - going in where performance is poor, client is having problems with their SQL Server, the OS and SQL itself are fine, they are doing a lot of work and stable; it's usually down to training, bad application design or poor archiecture etc... that cause problems.

I bought a couple of 500G Buffalo drives for backing stuff up at home
(couple of XP computers). It came with Memeo autobackup software.
The first time I used the backup, it died with a misleading error.
After some back-and-forth on their forum, eventually figured out it
was because Buffalo ships the drive formatted FAT-32, and Memeo was
trying to write a 4.5G file. Many questions about this on the board
and an answer in the FAQ which had no mention of this obvious and
stupid problem. Memeo leaves mysterious file handles open even after
you kill it off, making for some interesting issues trying to
reformat. Buffalo docs say to use their reformatting facility, which
doesn't have NTFS as an option. This is typical for most vendors in
the MS world and products from MS. At least, that has been my
experience over and over for more than a quarter century. Maybe it is
skewed, but so? Am I wrong to expect people writing software for
money to give at least a modicum of quality?

I think the clue here is that the default for XP and Vista is NTFS and if buffalo's apps don't support that then it is a reflection on the guys who make buffalo's software rather than Microsoft.

When you have a problem with your car do you blame the people who made the road?

skewed, but so? Am I wrong to expect people writing software for
money to give at least a modicum of quality?

Buffalo isn't MS, I do like the direction MS are taking with software certification - driver signing, Vista/ Windows 2003 certified etc... personally, I'd not buy nor install stuff that don't have these certifications.

Why should I think SQL Server, especially newer features trying to
catch up with what Oracle has had users pounding on for years, should
be any different? Whether Dan is biased or coming from a position of
knowledge, I agree with his sentiment.

The newer features are there because customers and folk in the community like me asked for them, they aren't creating features to catch up with oracle, stability is there, give it another 3 - 4 years and measure the two database products and their positions - it will be very interesting, I know I chose the correct product when I moved away from DB2 and could do oracle (well, I did it for 3 months) or SQL Server.

You don't have to think, just check the independant stats - ORacle is no longer the lead DB on Windows, it's SQL Server; I think ORacle realise that, why else would they delay there recently launched version only bringing a linux version out?

Anyway, it would seem you are starting to bash MS just for the sake of it rather than being balanced on your opinion, all too often with a number of oracle dba's - what is it with the attitude? Reminds me of the 17th century and missionaries trying to convert the masses to a specific doctrine.

--
Tony Rogerson, SQL Server MVP
http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/tonyrogerson
[Ramblings from the field from a SQL consultant]
http://sqlserverfaq.com
[UK SQL User Community]

.

Relevant Pages

  • 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)
  • Re: Database or store to handle 30 Mb/sec and 40,000 inserts/sec
    ... "Writers block readers and readers block writers in SQLServer. ... getting around this fundamental issue and because of it SQL Server ... admitted they can happen in Oracle, I guess Oracle should never been used ... isolation level but you will always disagree because you follow doctorine ...
    (comp.databases.oracle.server)
  • Re: IOT, memory and transaction time
    ... easily generate it with DBMS_METADATA.GET_DDL if your verison of Oracle ... If it was the update statement that references ... FOREIGN KEY (versionNo) REFERENCES T_TRANSACTIONS, ... There are however differences how both products deal with concurrency; in Oracle readers don't get blocked while this may happen in SQL Server. ...
    (comp.databases.oracle.misc)
  • Re: Import problems on Windows Server
    ... XP is fine, so is Vista, like you I use them day in day out, around 12 hours ... a day myself too - laptops and the desktop i'm writing this on. ... I use SQL Server on XP and Vista for writing and demo'ing stuff, ... those are the same problems in the Oracle world. ...
    (comp.databases.oracle.server)
  • Re: command line vs grid control
    ... have Oracle on-site for their line-of-business applications. ... customers that Oracle(all of its products not just the RDBMS) run on ... SQL Server where appropriate. ... Written any shell scripts in Windows to ...
    (comp.databases.oracle.server)