Posted by Tony Rogerson on 09/27/91 11:44

Yes, it is very difficult to compare the two products, often Oracle DBA's
like yourself concentrate purley on what the RDBMS engine has to offer.

They ignore that SQL Server is a product set that comes (as part of the
cost), an enterprise ETL tool, an enterprise OLAP tool, Reporting tool,
Notification Services, Service Broker (messaging tool), Textual Search, Data
Mining, a powerful set of developer tools, SQL Profiler, Database Engine
Tuning Advisor again - all come with the product.

With Oracle you pay for everything seperately and it costs a lot - the cost
of the profiler and database tuning tool comparitive is more than the cost
for SQL Serve itself!

The entry bar to 'Enterprise' has changed significantly, 5 - 10GB databases
used to be classified 'enterprise' 10 years ago but they are common place
now in the small / medium business tiers.

Most required Enterprise availability features are now in SQL Server 2005,
there are a number of 'specialist' features like RAC's that aren't yet but
it will come, only if business tells MS they want it though. I've heard so
many sob stories around RAC, I have the impression in a real situation they
don't really work.

There are different mindsets to creating a 24x7 environment, within the SQL
space (and application tier) its all about scaling out; you can do that
using peer to peer replication for instance, that can be implemented so that
the servers are on different continents, you do need to think around data
partitioning but it works.

I think oracle specialists like yourself and some others a frequent the
oracle forums get judgement clouded and think that the way oracle have
implemented solutions to solve business problems like availability is the
only way to do things - that just isn't true and shows a complete arrogance
within the industry - there are several ways to skin a cat and all have
merits and downsides, RAC for instance - the skill level and man power
required is high.

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

"DA Morgan" <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote in message
news:1144339895.223894@yasure.drizzle.com...
> Paul wrote:
>> Anyone know where I can find some good resources to help us choose
>> between SQL and Oracle ( Progress Openedge as well ) . Any comments on
>> what you would choose ?? We are creating a new Warehouse Management
>> System which wil manage our very large inventory.
>>
>> Anyway comments suggestions welcome
>>
>> Thanks
>> Paul
>
> This type of question generally invites a bloody good flame war but I will
> try to present some of the deltas that flavour Oracle in the least
> inflammatory way that I can.
>
> Be very careful when comparing these two products as the verbiage may be
> the same but the concepts and technologies can be very different. For
> example a database in SQL Sever equals a schema in Oracle and has
> absolutely nothing to do with the Oracle concept of a database. Neither
> is a SQL Server instance the same concept as an Oracle instance.
>
> Both products have log files but they work in very different ways. In
> SQL Server one sizes log files to handle the largest transaction and its
> rollback. In Oracle one can perform an infinitely large transaction
> using a couple of small log files.
>
> Both products have tables but that is pretty much where the similarity
> ends. Oracle provides heap tables (same as a SQL Server table) but also
> two types of global temporary tables (the tables aren't temporary ...
> the data is), external tables, compressed tables, index organized
> tables, nested tables, partitioned, and XML tables. Not to mention
> objects such as sorted hash clusters.
>
> Talk about indexes and in SQL Server you find BTree and Bitmap indexes.
> In Oracle you will also find bitmap join, compressed, descending,
> function-based, reverse key, and no-segment indexes.
>
> And this type of difference extends throughout the products. For example
> SQL Server has no object types that perform the functions of Oracle's
> packages, sequences, user-defined operators, rule-sets, and many more.
>
> Look at security and you will find the differences are very substantial
> as is the range of operating system options. You'll never run SQL Server
> on Linux. And on Windows you will always be the target of every virus,
> trojan, worm, and disgruntled employee that knows anything about the o/s.
> Be sure to look at auditing with Sarbanes-Oxley and similar laws
> in mind.
>
> How important is 7x24 operation? There is no SQL Server technology
> equivalent to Oracle' Real Application Clusters. They are working hard
> in Redmond to get it in a future version but that is years away. And
> how important would a capability such as resumable transactions be as
> Oracle provides with their DBMS_RESUMABLE built-in package?
>
> Be sure too to look at the differences in the transaction models. They
> are completely different. In Oracle reads never block writes and writes
> never block reads and there are an infinite number of row-level locks.
> Lock escalation does not exist.
>
> Finally, in spite of marketing types naming things to help sell them,
> the fact is that SQL Server's Enterprise Edition is approximately
> equal to Oracle's Standard Edition. Oracle's Enterprise Edition contains
> essentially nothing but features SQL Server does not offer. Only the
> name "Enterprise" is the same.
>
> Feel free to contact me off-line if you wish as I have no interest in
> fueling the inevitable name-calling any further than I already have.
> Also feel free to visit my web site "Morgan's Library" at www.psoug.org.
> --
> Daniel A. Morgan
> http://www.psoug.org
> damorgan@x.washington.edu
> (replace x with u to respond)

[Back to original message]