Re: Data Warehousing Tools - To Bundle Or Not to Bundle?

On Mon, 13 Apr 1998 02:25:22 GMT, drener@F#erols.com (Douglas J. Rener) wrote: > Hey Dave, > You should reread my post. I wasn't talking "SQL 6.5". I was > talking about "SQL 7.0". Your remark about "Looks like SQL server on > NT has quite a ways to go compared to Oracle" suddenly sounds > ludicrous. > I stand by my previous statement: > "from what I've seen of SQL 7.0 in terms of speed/performance, it > blows all the peer products away and gives Oracle a run for it's > money." > Doug Rener Since the subject of transactions per minute was brought up, here's my $0.02: I recently attended a seminar on Oracle 8 running on the NT platform. (Although Oracle has made huge strides on this platform recently, I still encourage clients to go toward UNIX for mission-critical or highly-scaled implementations. But I digress...) When comparing Oracle 8 and SQL Server 7 in terms of Transaction speed, Oracle had the best TPC-D showing on NT, although SQL Server did have better stats in the TPC-C benchmark. All other indicators were dominated by Oracle. Note that this was on NT, the platform where Microsoft will excel due to its tight integration. (I have no idea how the TPC benchmarks would compare if Oracle 8 was running on a high end Solaris box...) Basically, MS is trying to enter the Enterprise computing environment, and I was suprised to see Oracle pushing the notion of running their Server on NT with 3 GB of RAM allocated to the SGA.... Ultimately, it comes down to decisions made within the bigger picture. I have no doubt that SQL Server is an excellent product, but it has its strengths and weaknesses like anything else. Cheers, - Rob Cowitz