| Username |
Post |
| JackAss |
Posted
on 04-Mar-02 03:42 PM
Our company is using oracle DB right now. My senior engineer thinks we should migrate to SQL 2000, but I do not necessarily agree with that. What do you guys suggest? Yes, we are running IIS 5.
|
| Kancho |
Posted
on 04-Mar-02 03:57 PM
SQL 2000 is less expensive compared to Oracle.
|
| JackAss |
Posted
on 04-Mar-02 04:01 PM
Right.....Oracle has a high maintenance costs...if cost is not an issue...what should I go with?
|
| DB2 Connect |
Posted
on 04-Mar-02 07:56 PM
what about DB2 connect ?
|
| Sangey |
Posted
on 04-Mar-02 09:03 PM
If money is not an issue, I would say that Oracle is probably the best database available in the market. The 9i version seems to be quite impressive - considering such factors as tpms, scalability, security, etc. Marketshare-wise also Oracle is formidable. And then, how can one really ignore Ellison's claim, "$1M if your app runs faster in another db... blah blah blah" (I am quoting this as a joke).
I have also heard few good things about MS SQL 2000, but it is a Microsoft product afterall and I happen to be around the block too many times to trust them blindly. There could be a platform portability issue. Not sure if they have something similar to Inso filters (that functionality alone has given Oracle a huge leg-up in the db market). And I am skeptical of how efficiently it handles BLOBs.
Another database that might be of interest is PostGreSQL. It is quite robust. It does not have Inso Filter like support, if indexing is important to you, but it gets the job done quite well. Above all, it's free.
This is just an opnion off the top of my head, as a geek who pretends to know IT stuff, please make your decision after doing a thorough research.
Sangey
|
| Kancho |
Posted
on 05-Mar-02 11:01 AM
If its all Microsoft environment (IIS, ASP/ASP.net, COM) then SQL Server might be a better solution. But if you need JDBC, Oracle or mysql would be a better solution.
Here is a recent article on Eweek on database comparision/ stress test.
http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,s%253D708%2526a%253D23115,00.asp
Please be aware that they are testing this in JSP, JDBC, Java environment so SQL server does lose out here.
To read Microsoft's view, go to:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/compare/default.asp
|
| JackAss |
Posted
on 05-Mar-02 12:26 PM
Guys;
Thanks to all of you. We are using MS based solutions, everything but the Oracle DB. We are not using much of Java apps, no JDBC at all. At one time I configured oracle app server on windows based apache, except for earning experience, the process was not any easier than pulling tooth. I am sure we will be migrating to .Net architecture just to keep up with the technology. Now, the benchmark test shows that .Net architecture works very well with SQL 2000, above Java connectoids on Oracle platform. If we are ever down (knock on wood), it may be easier to trouble shoot a sql server. Keeping downtime to minimal is everything we all want, Oracle DBA's (good DBA) are hard to find. Ease of use provided by SQL is pretty simple and we do not have a need for million transactions/sec. Hopefully down the road, the person who'll take over my responsibilities, will undestand our system architectures without cussing me off a single time, that seems quite unlikely if we stick with ORACLE. But still I am not one hundred percent satisfied with the decision I have made. Thank you all for your feedbacks.
Have a great day.
|
