ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

[Niall Litchfield]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

"Hulse" <hulse_kevin@ya hoo.com> wrote in message
news:16926526.0 310211828.1ac77 033@posting.goo gle.com...[color=blue]
> Erland Sommarskog <sommar@algonet .se> wrote in message[/color]
news:<Xns941C29 886F12Yazorman@ 127.0.0.1>...[color=blue][color=green]
> > Daniel Morgan (damorgan@x.was hington.edu) writes:[color=darkred]
> > > Not sure if you can get SQL Server for free[/color]
> >
> > Not completely, but there is a 120-day evaluation version available.
> > See item 6 on http://www.microsoft.com/sql/downloads/topdownloads.asp.[/color]
>
> It is quite easy to get free copies of Oracle. They will be
> unlicensed of course. However, you will be free to install
> and run them. They are not cripple-ware. They are the full
> installation packs. So you can use Oracle 9.2 EE for NT or
> Linux without limitation (barring SBA audits).[/color]

They are not unlicensed. You agree to a licence when you download them -
basically non-commercial use so it fits the OP requirements for which is
better to learn. Equally you cannot use them without restriction, the
restrictions are however reasonable.

As far as learning MSSQL goes, I think that I would go with MSDE on the
grounds that 120 days to learn a RDBMS is somewhat ambitious.


--
Niall Litchfield
Oracle DBA
Audit Commission Uk

[Daniel Morgan]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

Comments in-line

John Bell wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Actually when it comes to lowend hardware, Oracle and MSSQL are
>>more of an even heat. Both can be deployed on meagre hardware if your
>>thruput requirements are similarly meagre.
>>
>>[/color]
>
>I would disagree with that, although I have not done any benchmarks, my
>experience of Oracle on the same windows platform is that SQL Server is that
>SQL server is the more performant. When you start looking at the User tools
>then Oracle with all the overhead and clunkiness of Java means that SQL
>Server wins on productivity and reliability too.
>
>I know there are good third party tools available that will level the score,
>and IMO the need for these with Oracle is higher!
>[/color]
Your experience is purely anecdotal. Other people's experience may well
differ. But one thing is definite
and that is that I can put either SQL Server or Oracle on a single CPU
Pentium machine and both will
run. But while SQL Server will only run on the Windows operating system
with Oracle an organization
has the choice to avoid paying hundreds of dollars for the operating
system, they can choose Linux, and
also avoid all of the problems with the huge number of Windows only
virus, worm, and trojan attacks.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Storage and memory requirements will be similar for both
>>products. You won't be able to get away with skimping on the disk
>>hardware just because it's a Microsoft database. OTOH, Oracle can run
>>on the same Dell/Compaq hardware that msSQL uses. Just run Linux
>>rather than Solaris.
>>
>>[/color]
>
>Oracle on Linux would be a good choice. Whether the poster would want to
>dual boot or buy another machine is different approach.
>[/color]
For a server dual boot would be pretty foolish. Servers are not supposed
to be rebooted.

--
Daniel Morgan

http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp

http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp

damorgan@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Will_2112]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?


Ok, Well Oracle is the granddaddy of them all.
But in a breakdown of the deals SQL server is better....
I have a very long paper that my Boss wrote that illustrated the
difference in speeds and costs, by far, SQL server blows away Oracle and
it is much easier to use. Oracle has to many module to do the tasks that
in SQL server are a speed fix. Try to go to do a quick adhoc query in
oracle 9I, Good luck. Also, I did purchase the evaluation copy of 9I it
was like $90 and this convinced me that SQL server was much better.
Beware, to uninstall the version of Oracle 9Iis very hard I have
uninstalled it over 10 times and it is still showing up as an agent in
my autoexec.bat I can not get rid of it. SQL server is unistallable ez

Will

*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

[Bill shrek Thater]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

Daniel Morgan wrote:
[color=blue]
> Your experience is purely anecdotal. Other people's experience may
> well differ. But one thing is definite and that is that I can put
> either SQL Server or Oracle on a single CPU Pentium machine and both
> will run. But while SQL Server will only run on the Windows operating
> system with Oracle an organization has the choice to avoid paying
> hundreds of dollars for the operating system, they can choose Linux,
> and also avoid all of the problems with the huge number of Windows
> only virus, worm, and trojan attacks.[/color]

the ability exists, however at this point in time most companies do not
have the talent available to manage other than Windows servers unless
they are large enough to have Unix server farms. in that case they
already would have Oracle installed on a unix platform. smaller
companies would tend not to choose Oracle due to the lack of talent
mentionsed as well as the adversity to adding a DBA to staff.

--
Bill "Shrek" Thater ORACLE DBA
"I'm going to work my ticket if I can..." -- Gilwell song
william.thater@ carrier.utc.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. He
sits on a hot stove for a minute, it's longer than any hour. That is
relativity. - Albert Einstein

[Daniel Morgan]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

Bill shrek Thater wrote:
[color=blue]
>Daniel Morgan wrote:
>
>
>[color=green]
>>Your experience is purely anecdotal. Other people's experience may
>>well differ. But one thing is definite and that is that I can put
>>either SQL Server or Oracle on a single CPU Pentium machine and both
>>will run. But while SQL Server will only run on the Windows operating
>>system with Oracle an organization has the choice to avoid paying
>>hundreds of dollars for the operating system, they can choose Linux,
>>and also avoid all of the problems with the huge number of Windows
>>only virus, worm, and trojan attacks.
>>
>>[/color]
>
>the ability exists, however at this point in time most companies do not
>have the talent available to manage other than Windows servers unless
>they are large enough to have Unix server farms. in that case they
>already would have Oracle installed on a unix platform. smaller
>companies would tend not to choose Oracle due to the lack of talent
>mentionsed as well as the adversity to adding a DBA to staff.
>
>--
>Bill "Shrek" Thater ORACLE DBA
>"I'm going to work my ticket if I can..." -- Gilwell song
> william.thater@ carrier.utc.com
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>A man sits with a pretty girl for an hour, it seems like a minute. He
>sits on a hot stove for a minute, it's longer than any hour. That is
>relativity. - Albert Einstein
>
>[/color]
You are correct but as with all things that too is changing. The next
release of Oracle, 10g, will have
all of the ease of use of SQL Server and a price that is equal or lower
from what I hear.

Add to that IBM's purchase of Informix and you can expect the RDBMS
marketplace to get a lot
more interesting in the next few years.

--
Daniel Morgan

http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp

http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp

damorgan@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Daniel Morgan]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

Will_2112 wrote:
[color=blue]
>Ok, Well Oracle is the granddaddy of them all.
>But in a breakdown of the deals SQL server is better....
>I have a very long paper that my Boss wrote that illustrated the
>difference in speeds and costs, by far, SQL server blows away Oracle and
>it is much easier to use. Oracle has to many module to do the tasks that
>in SQL server are a speed fix. Try to go to do a quick adhoc query in
>oracle 9I, Good luck. Also, I did purchase the evaluation copy of 9I it
>was like $90 and this convinced me that SQL server was much better.
>Beware, to uninstall the version of Oracle 9Iis very hard I have
>uninstalled it over 10 times and it is still showing up as an agent in
>my autoexec.bat I can not get rid of it. SQL server is unistallable ez
>
>Will
>
>*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
>Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
>
>[/color]
I can write a paper that proves that 3x5 cards are faster and easier to
use too: Means nothing.
SQL Server is a perfectly good product. It doesn't need to be defending
by people whose
attempt at a cure is worse than the disease.

Normally I ignore posts such as your but some of your statements are so
nonsensical as to be
pure whimsy. And I say that as someone that has, over the years,
developed in every one of
the major commercial RDBMS products.

For example you wrote: "Try to go to do a quick adhoc query in oracle
9I, Good luck."

Do you really believe this or are you totally ignorant about other RDBMS
products and
just wish to make sure everyone knows it?

I can write the exact same ad hoc SQL statement, with equal ease in SQL
Server, Sybase,
Informix, DB2, and amazingly enough Oracle.

You should stick to facts when posting. What your wrote is more suitable
for a comic book
than a technical group.

--
Daniel Morgan

http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp

http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp

damorgan@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Guinness Mann]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

In article <j0jlb.41302$Sc 7.7924@twister. nyroc.rr.com>, "Greg D. Moore
\(Strider\)" <mooregr@greenm s.com> says...[color=blue]
> And the developer's edition [of SQL Server 2000]
> is now fairly cheap as I recall.[/color]

Fifty bucks for the full (developer's license) enterprise edition of SQL
Server 2000. Less, I think if you get it from a reseller. Great deal.

Now if they only had a developer's license edition of Windows Server
2003...

-- Rick

[Robert C]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ? (WARNING: TROLL ALERT!)

what's a troll in this context ?


"Noons" <wizofoz2k@yaho o.com.au> wrote in message
news:73e20c6c.0 310211331.5b22a 4e4@posting.goo gle.com...[color=blue]
> EnglishTeacher@ ModernEnglish.c om (English Teacher) wrote in message[/color]
news:<b06436f6. 0310202251.15ee c0c@posting.goo gle.com>...[color=blue][color=green]
> > Which would be a more useful relational database server to learn
> > nowadays: MS SQL SERVER or ORACLE?[/color]
>
>
> This poster is a well known troll. Reply at your own risk.[/color]

[Daniel Morgan]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

Guinness Mann wrote:
[color=blue]
>In article <j0jlb.41302$Sc 7.7924@twister. nyroc.rr.com>, "Greg D. Moore
>\(Strider\)" <mooregr@greenm s.com> says...
>
>[color=green]
>>And the developer's edition [of SQL Server 2000]
>>is now fairly cheap as I recall.
>>
>>[/color]
>
>Fifty bucks for the full (developer's license) enterprise edition of SQL
>Server 2000. Less, I think if you get it from a reseller. Great deal.
>
>Now if they only had a developer's license edition of Windows Server
>2003...
>
>-- Rick
>
>[/color]
So if the point was strictly dollars I could buy a PIII machine off eBay
for a about $300.
I could put Oracle on it for free (by download) or SQL Server 2000 for $50.

I can then more than double the cost of my development environment by
getting Windows XP
or I could get the O/S for free with Linux. Pretty sad when the
operating system costs more
than the hardware and the database.

--
Daniel Morgan

http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp

http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp

damorgan@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Skip Middleton]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ? (WARNING: TROLL ALERT!)

Multiple cross posts to unrelated newsgroups. Of which, of course, I am now
guilty, since I don't know which grp. to direct my reply.

--
Skip Middleton

https://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

"Robert C" <rchin@panix.co m> wrote in message
news:bn6pl8$a0u $1@reader1.pani x.com...[color=blue]
> what's a troll in this context ?
>
>
> "Noons" <wizofoz2k@yaho o.com.au> wrote in message
> news:73e20c6c.0 310211331.5b22a 4e4@posting.goo gle.com...[color=green]
> > EnglishTeacher@ ModernEnglish.c om (English Teacher) wrote in message[/color]
> news:<b06436f6. 0310202251.15ee c0c@posting.goo gle.com>...[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Which would be a more useful relational database server to learn
> > > nowadays: MS SQL SERVER or ORACLE?[/color]
> >
> >
> > This poster is a well known troll. Reply at your own risk.[/color]
>
>[/color]

[Brian Peasland]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ? (WARNING: TROLL ALERT!)

Someone who lurks around, popping their head up occasionally, only to
cause trouble.

Cheers,
Brian

Robert C wrote:[color=blue]
>
> what's a troll in this context ?
>
> "Noons" <wizofoz2k@yaho o.com.au> wrote in message
> news:73e20c6c.0 310211331.5b22a 4e4@posting.goo gle.com...[color=green]
> > EnglishTeacher@ ModernEnglish.c om (English Teacher) wrote in message[/color]
> news:<b06436f6. 0310202251.15ee c0c@posting.goo gle.com>...[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Which would be a more useful relational database server to learn
> > > nowadays: MS SQL SERVER or ORACLE?[/color]
> >
> >
> > This poster is a well known troll. Reply at your own risk.[/color][/color]

--
=============== =============== =============== =============== =======

Brian Peasland
dba@remove_spam .peasland.com

Remove the "remove_spa m." from the email address to email me.


"I can give it to you cheap, quick, and good. Now pick two out of
the three"

[Burt Peltier]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

--
"John Bell" <jbellnewsposts @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f963ad7$0 $251$ed9e5944@r eading.news.pip ex.net...[color=blue][color=green]
> > Actually when it comes to lowend hardware, Oracle and MSSQL are
> > more of an even heat. Both can be deployed on meagre hardware if your
> > thruput requirements are similarly meagre.[/color]
>
> I would disagree with that, although I have not done any benchmarks, my
> experience of Oracle on the same windows platform is that SQL Server is[/color]
that[color=blue]
> SQL server is the more performant. When you start looking at the User[/color]
tools

And if you put Linux and Oracle on that same exact hardware, you would most
likely notice Oracle is "more performant".
[color=blue]
> then Oracle with all the overhead and clunkiness of Java means that SQL
> Server wins on productivity and reliability too.
>
> I know there are good third party tools available that will level the[/color]
score,[color=blue]
> and IMO the need for these with Oracle is higher!
>[color=green]
> > However, Oracle will probably scale much better should your needs
> > be more than trivial. Oracle runs on machines with as many as 105
> > cpus, Oracle has more transparent clustering, and MSSQL doesn't
> > support table/index partitioning.[/color]
>
> Well this was way beyond the scope of poster!!
>[color=green]
> > Storage and memory requirements will be similar for both
> > products. You won't be able to get away with skimping on the disk
> > hardware just because it's a Microsoft database. OTOH, Oracle can run
> > on the same Dell/Compaq hardware that msSQL uses. Just run Linux
> > rather than Solaris.[/color]
>
> Oracle on Linux would be a good choice. Whether the poster would want to
> dual boot or buy another machine is different approach.
>[color=green]
> >[color=darkred]
> > > the edge, but if you are looking for multiplatform capabilities then[/color][/color]
> Sybase,[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > DB2 or Oracle may be alternatives to consider.[/color]
> > [deletia][/color]
>
> John
>
>[/color]

[Robert C]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ? (WARNING: TROLL ALERT!)

Don't get it...
Cause what trouble ?
What fun/satisfaction does the troll get ?
Most of time people do things for a reason....


"Brian Peasland"[color=blue]
> Someone who lurks around, popping their head up occasionally, only to
> cause trouble.
>
> Cheers,
> Brian
>
> Robert C wrote:[color=green]
> >
> > what's a troll in this context ?
> >
> > "Noons" <wizofoz2k@yaho o.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:73e20c6c.0 310211331.5b22a 4e4@posting.goo gle.com...[color=darkred]
> > > EnglishTeacher@ ModernEnglish.c om (English Teacher) wrote in message[/color]
> > news:<b06436f6. 0310202251.15ee c0c@posting.goo gle.com>...[color=darkred]
> > > > Which would be a more useful relational database server to learn
> > > > nowadays: MS SQL SERVER or ORACLE?
> > >
> > >
> > > This poster is a well known troll. Reply at your own risk.[/color][/color]
>
> --
> =============== =============== =============== =============== =======
>
> Brian Peasland
> dba@remove_spam .peasland.com
>
> Remove the "remove_spa m." from the email address to email me.
>
>
> "I can give it to you cheap, quick, and good. Now pick two out of
> the three"[/color]

[Skip Middleton]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ? (WARNING: TROLL ALERT!)

Could you guys PLEASE edit out the non pertinent newsgroups to this
discussion, like rec.woodworking , rec.photo.digit al and rec
photo.equipment .35mm? Please?!?

--
Skip Middleton

https://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

"Robert C" <rchin@panix.co m> wrote in message
news:bn9du1$abo $1@reader1.pani x.com...[color=blue]
> Don't get it...
> Cause what trouble ?
> What fun/satisfaction does the troll get ?
> Most of time people do things for a reason....
>
>
> "Brian Peasland"[color=green]
> > Someone who lurks around, popping their head up occasionally, only to
> > cause trouble.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Brian
> >
> > Robert C wrote:[color=darkred]
> > >
> > > what's a troll in this context ?
> > >
> > > "Noons" <wizofoz2k@yaho o.com.au> wrote in message
> > > news:73e20c6c.0 310211331.5b22a 4e4@posting.goo gle.com...
> > > > EnglishTeacher@ ModernEnglish.c om (English Teacher) wrote in message
> > > news:<b06436f6. 0310202251.15ee c0c@posting.goo gle.com>...
> > > > > Which would be a more useful relational database server to learn
> > > > > nowadays: MS SQL SERVER or ORACLE?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This poster is a well known troll. Reply at your own risk.[/color]
> >
> > --
> > =============== =============== =============== =============== =======
> >
> > Brian Peasland
> > dba@remove_spam .peasland.com
> >
> > Remove the "remove_spa m." from the email address to email me.
> >
> >
> > "I can give it to you cheap, quick, and good. Now pick two out of
> > the three"[/color]
>
>[/color]

[Hulse]

Re: ORACLE or SQL SERVER (MS) ?

"Niall Litchfield" <n-litchfield@audi t-commission.gov. uk> wrote in message news:<3f964b5e$ 0$250$ed9e5944@ reading.news.pi pex.net>...[color=blue]
> "Hulse" <hulse_kevin@ya hoo.com> wrote in message
> news:16926526.0 310211828.1ac77 033@posting.goo gle.com...[color=green]
> > Erland Sommarskog <sommar@algonet .se> wrote in message[/color]
> news:<Xns941C29 886F12Yazorman@ 127.0.0.1>...[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > Daniel Morgan (damorgan@x.was hington.edu) writes:
> > > > Not sure if you can get SQL Server for free
> > >
> > > Not completely, but there is a 120-day evaluation version available.
> > > See item 6 on http://www.microsoft.com/sql/downloads/topdownloads.asp.[/color]
> >
> > It is quite easy to get free copies of Oracle. They will be
> > unlicensed of course. However, you will be free to install
> > and run them. They are not cripple-ware. They are the full
> > installation packs. So you can use Oracle 9.2 EE for NT or
> > Linux without limitation (barring SBA audits).[/color]
>
> They are not unlicensed. You agree to a licence when you download them -
> basically non-commercial use so it fits the OP requirements for which is[/color]

For all practical purposes, what I said was correct. Anything but
a highly trivial use of the software will be unauthorized.
[color=blue]
> better to learn. Equally you cannot use them without restriction, the
> restrictions are however reasonable.[/color]

The restrictions are not built into the software. There are no ticking
time bombs or crippled features. You could run Orbitz with the demoware
available at Oracle's website.

Oracle's demoware is not crippleware.
[color=blue]
>
> As far as learning MSSQL goes, I think that I would go with MSDE on the
> grounds that 120 days to learn a RDBMS is somewhat ambitious.[/color]