Re: NT server, pro/con

The only thing I've heard bad about NT is the fact that it does hit a roof with large databases and a large number of concurrent users. Also it scales only up to two INTEL CPUs in reality - some guy I worked with had NT 3.5 on a two PENTIUM box and maxed it out, he then ran the same ORacle database on a four Pentium box and it was 10% faster than the 2 Pentium box. They were looking into Solaris and UnixWare last I heard. But I have seen small workgroups running NT and it is fast . . . In terms of learning - NT is still confusing for me. Than again, so it UNIX. Whatever you're familiar with I guess. Stephen H Fick (shf@world.std.com) wrote: : While working on an assignment to choose a database product, : I've just been asked to look into using an NT server : rather than a Sun Solaris 2.x server. : I'm interested in hearing people's evaluation of the merits : and demerits of an NT server in a server/client RDB : environment. Speed, reliability, security, expandability, : ease of learning the system administration work, ease of : performing it--talking here about the NT side of things, : not the RDB side--are obvious areas of concern. Are there : others? How does NT stack up, to date? : As you may have deduced, I have plenty of Unix experience, : none with NT. : Will be glad to post a summary, or to forward to individual : responders. : Tia, : Steve -- Tim Wong roadgoat@crl.com "Sometimes it's only madness that makes us what we are." - Grant Morrison