October 4, 2007 at 9:28 am
"SQL Server is better than Oracle"
"Why?"
"Because"
"Why Because?"
"Because it just is"
RegardsRudy KomacsarSenior Database Administrator"Ave Caesar! - Morituri te salutamus."
October 4, 2007 at 9:39 am
Carl Federl (10/4/2007)
Q: How many Oracle DBAs does it take to change a light bulb ?A: Three - it takes three Oracle DBAs to do anything.
Q: How many SQL Server DBAs does it take to change a light bulb ?
A: None - SQL Server automatically changes light bulbs.
The new Oracle light bulbs are $100,000 each plus $1,000 for every one who sees the light, and old light bulbs aren't licensed to work with the latest version. If you have 220 volts, instead of 110, it's another $100,000.
October 4, 2007 at 11:00 am
Oracle's boss is Larry Ellision, he did anything to try to be number one. Oracle is behind Microsoft right now. After he took over Peoplesoft, he just bought Hyperion. In an article I read a while ago in Time or Newsweek magazine, he was arrogant, competitive and rude.
I worked with Oracle consultants a lot, when you bought Oracle, you needed to hire Oracle consultant, the damn thing was so complicated that no one knew what to do when they got it from the box. Most of the independent consultants were very nice. But the one who worked at Oracle somehow got Larry's influence - arrogant and rude. Even the Oracle DBAs attitude were different from SQL Server DBAs. They felt they were more superior. Maybe just the Oracle DBAs I met !!!!
As far as programming, Oracle SQL is the same as SQL Server SQL - FALSE. PL/SQL = T-SQL - FALSE.
Just don't tell the recruiters.
October 4, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Oracle secret weapon is VP Jim Melton who is ANSI SQL editor who edited the XML section in ANSI SQL 2006. That got me very worried because for political reasons Microsoft could just wait until the XML people finish the needed Algebra before implementing real XQuery which could be too late for SQL Server 2008. So for XML data intensive Web application you may still need to reach out and touch Data Direct who owns the XQuery url and sells an almost idiot proof albeit expensive tool.
Oracle does not sell developer edition of its RDBMS so for now it is like C.J.Date said do data as algebra and ask how is this implemented by Oracle.
Kind regards,
Gift Peddie
October 4, 2007 at 12:17 pm
I like both but I do have to say that with enterprise class systems (8CPUs +) the scalability of SQL Server could become a problem. I would love to hear the experiences of others who have seen workloads from 40,000+ concurrent users.
From what I’ve seen with these larger systems you have to buy one big supercomputer and make sure to have extra slots for CPUs, memory, and additional fiber cards for scalability. With Oracle you just go the two midrange node RAC route and add one additional machine if you need to scale further.
October 4, 2007 at 12:44 pm
I know I'm not the brightest spark in the universe but what is the point of reproducing audibly, via the Audio (MP3) click, what is written in the email? I expected more, at least some valid reasons rather than jokey trivialities.
October 4, 2007 at 12:58 pm
I have a mixed marriage: I manage a SQL Server team and my husband manages an Oracle team.
We have agreed to disagree...for the children's sake.
p.s. the new site design and forum software is nice.
October 4, 2007 at 2:54 pm
jay holovacs (10/4/2007)
When my son got married I went out for drinks with a bunch of his friends.You haven't lived till you get roasted by a bunch half drunk Oracle guys.
Always fun when you can't tell if you didn't get the joke because it was something arcane, or you're just too damn drunk:)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
October 4, 2007 at 3:01 pm
Kristin Echols (10/4/2007)
I have a mixed marriage: I manage a SQL Server team and my husband manages an Oracle team.We have agreed to disagree...for the children's sake.
p.s. the new site design and forum software is nice.
Let me guess - their initials are PL and T, respectively.
I'm not sure what the debate about - I just got a notice in my e-mail that the new REALSQL server was going to blow both products away...by Christmas:P. With a name like that - it must be REAL, so I guess it's time to start learning something new. I've already started reformatting all of my SQL servers, so that I'm ready for this new product, which apparently will serve up my data AND my MP3's at the same time....:hehe:
Now - if I could just get it to make coffee as well.... I think that would be a major Service Broker enhancement ("I'd like my Volcano dark roast, not now but soon").
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
October 4, 2007 at 4:10 pm
Okey Dokey. Well if you want serious. I have 10g Dev Express loaded locally and it works very well. That's about the best I can say about Oracle here.
As far the corporation goes we have two major apps, one on SQL Server and one on Oracle. Moving to sql 2005 clustered we noticed an improvement on an already responsive SQK Server system.
Our Oracle 9i RAC has been nothing but trouble (it sits on Linux, that's not a comment). We had Oracle people (paid by Oracle type people) here for a month trying to get acceptable performance. They sort of succeeded.
We are now dropping the Oracle RAC environment and moving as much as possible off Oracle to SQL Server. Cost and performance based driven.
We expect just running Oracle financials on Oracle will give us reasonable performance - and it is an excellent (not cheap) product.
Apart from being a DBA with a foot in both puddles I am also (DON'T TELL ANYONE) a developer. I find SQL Server easier to work with but as a developer they are both just datastores with some caveats
When I dabbled with VS Enterprise Library Logging I just could not get dates to work. I had to use a trigger to insert the Oracle dates. And yes I tried using ODP .NEt from Oracle to build my own logging sink. Bizarre things like this pop up with Oracle on a regular basis.
Elsewhere I have seen Oracle properly implemented with well designed large scale applications and before SQL 2005 I don't think SQL Server could even be in the race. But thiings are changing quickly.
Over to you.
The systems fine with no users loggged in. Can we keep it that way ?br>
October 4, 2007 at 4:39 pm
I can't really give an imformed opinion about Oracle, but i did notice a comment about how you could use SQL Server out of the box. I can understand not wanting to have to spend a huge amount setting it up, but having worked at a place where people think it is just a glorified Access and doesn't even have DBA's or anyone administrating it with developers using it badly in lots of different, disperate ways you can go too far in the other direction.
Having said that and being a SQL Server developer I have to say i've nothing but praise for SQL Server.
October 5, 2007 at 1:16 am
I've been required to use Oracle more and more in the last couple of months... the more I learn about it and the more I use it, the more I hate it 😛
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 5, 2007 at 2:13 am
After reading this editorial (???), I think about unsubscribing me from this site!
Says something without justify it, bahhhh
October 5, 2007 at 6:36 am
Vladimiro Buda (10/5/2007)
After reading this editorial (???), I think about unsubscribing me from this site!Says something without justify it, bahhhh
It's a JOKE :laugh:
Let me put it this way. I was an Oracle DBA since the very early 90's, I was a UNIX and if you have ever heard of this (Aegis/Apollo - You win a prize (talk to Steve)) system administrator before that.
The ONLY thing that SQL Server hasn't been able to do that Oracle did well was handle a VERY active Heterogeneous environment well (short and long transactions in same database). This was due to the blocking/deadlocking issues associated with 2000 and past releases. Other than that it blew Oracle away.
With Snapshot isolation mode in 2005 you get the best of both worlds. If you need it, you use it, if not don't.
One time I had a $4 Million Cluster with Oracle 8i Parallel server (which we had upgraded from 8.0). It got so toasted I had to crash the SERVER!!! We had 5 different "Experts" Come in to solve the unexplained issue.
FYI the issue was that one of the (at the time) 250 startup parameters default value changed from running queries locally unless specified to run on all nodes to run on all nodes unless specified to run locally.
This caused the private network to become saturated and the heartbeat couldn't even be detected during even minor loads. We missed it during testing because simulating 50,000 users working on the system wasn't in the budget 🙂
It was nice being the guy 😎 everyone called in a company with (5000 IT people and 300 DBA's) when it really got bad. But knowing that there are 2 others in a company (with 15 IT and 2 DBA's) that can handle almost any situation is nicer 🙂
October 5, 2007 at 6:44 am
Another thing. I just restored 4 databases from production to our test environment. (took all of 2 minutes).
In my past life, I would have requested 2 weeks to do that.
Granted it would only take me about an hour or two, but still 2 minutes to 2 hours.
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 90 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply