Re: Informix vs. Sybase vs. Oracle vs. (gasp) MS SQL Server

Reid Fleming wrote: > Larry Stephenson <larrst@digital.net> wrote: > > > > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I have been asked to do a comparison of captioned database > engines, > >> to choose a database server for a medium size database (less than > 2GB, > >> about 60-100 tables). > >> > >> I would appreciate both pointers to professionally done > comparisons, as > >> well as your personal opinions on performance and reliabiilty of > these > >> systems. > >> > >> There is a special emphasis made on reliability, so your accounts > of > >> problems and crashes will be much appreciated. Oh yes, the > hardware > >> will likely be Sun or IBM RS6000. > >> > >> Thank you. > >> > >> igor > > > I've worked with all three. IMHO, they each have their own points: > > Sybase - great environment for administering or developing. The > weakest point was its 'page-level locking'. That means that if you > have a lot of users trying to get at the same tables, you'll often > have users locked out. If they got this problem fixed, I'd > recommend > it the most. > > Informix - great use of processing power on SMP computers. Fast > loads and indexing, and the OLTP seems to function well. I really > liked the stability and reliability as well. I recommend this > database be used for your situation. > > Oracle - lots of people use this. It has some strengths, such as > row level locking, but the environment for developers and > administrators are a little kludgy. It doesn't have some utilities > found in Informix or Sybase, like a fast 'unload' utility for > getting > data out of tables. ( I hear there are some third party products > that > will do this). Overall very solid performance....just needs a few > more bells and whistles. > > By the way, I'd highly recommend that you go with Suns over the > RS6000. I've had experience with these databases on the RS6000's, > the Sun servers, and HP 9000's. You really need a box that's more > scalable than the RS6000 if you think of increasing your DB size or > the number of users. The multi-machine approach that IBM takes > to scalability does not work as well as a big, single box that can > take up to 12 processors. I think the databases are just not > written > in a way that take advantage of them. > > Hope this helps Not quite sure what you mean by 'The multi-machine approach that IBM takes to scalability does not work as well as a big, single box that can take up to 12 processors. I think the databases are just not written in a way that take advantage of them.'? The IBM RS6000 J30 and R30 models can take 2, 4, 6 or 8 processors in an SMP environment which Oracle 7 will fully exploit. How would an Sun or HP SMP server differ? Steve Phelan.