Yukon Release Dates
-
I just got back from the XML Conference (12/8-12/11) in Philly. One of the presentations was on Web Services using Yukon and what was possible. When the MS rep was asked when Yukon was going to be released he said:
Public Yukon beta release end of 1st Q2004.
Full Yukon release end of 4th Q2004.
He also covered his bases by saying that it may be earlier.
-
That's about what we got at PASS. Feeling was that late 2004 might be ambitious. Might be early 2005.
Steve Jones
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/sjones
The Best of SQL Server Central.com 2002 - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/bestof/
-
2005 sounds right. The presenter was not too optimistic in the prediction that Yukon would be ready at the end of 2004. Although what I saw looked good with reguards to the XML improvements.
My only complaint is that the release is taking too long. Competition wise they are already 2 full releases behind Oracle (9i and 10G both of which have 64bit versions) and I have yet to see anything from them that I don’t already see from Oracle or IBM’s UDB. Lastly, I find it annoying that the research their database scientists do -which gets published in VLDB and other comp sci. journals -does not make it into the product soon enough. But that is just my academic gripe; I understand that it takes 5-10 years to go from research to practice. However, how hard would it be for them to offer some other type of index beyond the common B-tree, the other index types already exist and the beginning algorithms for them were published years ago so why no development there? My apologies to all for the gripe.
-
I'd say the core products (all 3) Are about the same. there is higher scalability in Oracle, but I'm not sure the vast majority if people need it. Cost is also an issue, SS2K leads here.
For most installations, I think SS2K can easily compete with the other 3. Plus is requires less babysitting by DBAs. I would like to see more advances, but to me, SS2K adheres to KISS better than Oracle or DB2.
Steve Jones
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/sjones
The Best of SQL Server Central.com 2002 - http://www.sqlservercentral.com/bestof/
-
Not just scalability, it simply does not have some enterprise features. Oracle has Dataguard ( sql's log shipping) which allows automated failover, handles spatial datatypes and load balancing. When companies need these features which i think a 200 mill+ company will what do MSSQL lovers do ?
-
You have to compare like with like. Oracle has many features that can be added on and cost many more dollars. I know that ther are issues with SQL and clustering. We use a SQL 7 database on Windows NT running on top of a marathon endurance server which sits it two rooms. You can go right up to one of them and pull out the disks, disconnect the network or just turn it off and things just run on regardless. It has been said you could blow up one of them and the other wuold run on though I have yet to test this
It was quite expensive, at the time, but not when compared to running a couple of Unix boxes with Oracle.Oh and we do run Oracle here as well for our ERP system. I like them both but SQL is much more friendly to administer and some of the Java GUIs with Oracle (8i) are annoyingly slow.
Which is better Yukon decide for yourself.
Nigel Moore
====================== -
With Oracle 10g being pretty stable right out the door and prices in the database field dropping like rocks; the old conception and valuations of databases are up in the air. MS has to get something out pretty soon to match the competition. Also the push to Enterprise Linux servers is very real - two big clients went that way so it won't be my SQL Server & OLAP favorite in those shops.
My concern: will Yukon be able to set new TPC benchmark records like SQL Server 2000 did?
Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply