Re: ORACLE vs INFORMIX vs MS SQL SERVER

On 5 Nov 98, at 16:46, Art S. Kagel wrote: > Billy Wheeler wrote: > > > > On 5 Nov 98, at 10:56, Alessio Milan wrote: > > > > > "Dariusz Tomon" <darek.tomon@uzp.gov.pl> writes: > > > > > > > Genelmen > > > > > > > > I got the task to choose the database for my company (Polish > > > > Information Agency). The main task of the database would be: manage > > > > of 1000000 scanned pictures (high resolution each +-30 MB) > > > > > > What? 1000000 * 30 MB = 30 TeraByte!! > > > What kind of database can store and manage such amount of data? > > > > Informix or Oracle. Informix is working on a NASA project where > > they're mapping out the earth, and they're gathering 1TB of data > > _per_day_! > > That requires a 64bit machine with 64bit OS and 64bit Informix version (ie > currently HP/UX 11 or Solaris 2.? (64bit vers) with IDS 7.30FC3 (64 bit > version) only). Or DEC (OSF/1?) or SGI (IRIX). > The data limit for a 32bit Informix IDS instance is 2TB of data total > (1024 chunks @ 2GB each == 2TB). Only 64bit implementations overcome this > by a) allowing chunks > 2GB and b) increasing pagesize to 4K which allows > 2048 chunks. On 64bit the data is virtually unlimited. With 18GB drive as > a single chunk 2048 chunks = 36TB and using RAID to create larger virtual > drives the sky is the limit since the OS limits llseek() offsets to 1024GB > for RAW devices that makes the actual hard limit 2048TB. (What is that > called 2PetaBytes?) I think so... -- Ciao, Billy /Group Managing Director, The West Solutions Group: http://www.west.co.za \\ Drivel @ http://www.west.co.za/tasteless/ / \\ "Granted, Mr Wheeler's ideas are stupid and unreasonable, but he does own the company and I / think we should go along with him..." \\________________________________________________________________________________________________