Choosing a right database

Hello all; First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. I need an advice from gurus of database design and development I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes per second. Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one is the best in your opinion? My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that I am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase or MS Sql-Server, sorry to people who like them??? Your help is greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance /****************************************************************************/ Alla Gribov alla.gribov@metatel.com The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever since. Moral: design before you implement. /****************************************************************************/

I think Oracle or Teradata would be the best. Bye Mario * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

Sorry you don't like Sybase, but you really should consider it. Given the # of users you are going to have, you are likely going to consider replication, if you haven't already. Sybase's replication is a LOT better than Oracle's, for many reasons which I don't want to take the time to go into. I am not familiar with Informix or Taradata... Alla Gribov wrote in message <37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com>... >Hello all; > >First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions >posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > >I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > >I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any >given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. >The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes >per second. > >Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one >is the best in your opinion? > >My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it >seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > >Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that I >am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase or >MS Sql-Server, >sorry to people who like them??? > >Your help is greatly appreciated. > >Thanks in advance > > >/************************************************************************** **/ > Alla Gribov > alla.gribov@metatel.com >The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh >day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever >since. Moral: design before you implement. >/************************************************************************** **/

Is your application transactional (operational) or analytical (data warehouse)? There are systems that work in one realm but not the other. Of course, there are some that work in both and vendors who have different offerings in both. Since you asked about two vendors in particular, I'll say that if you want a mainstream RDBMS vendor, Informix has better-performing, much-easier-to-administer offerings in both domains. Seth Alla Gribov wrote: > > Hello all; > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes > per second. > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one > is the best in your opinion? > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that I > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase or > MS Sql-Server, > sorry to people who like them??? > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > Thanks in advance > > /****************************************************************************/ > Alla Gribov > alla.gribov@metatel.com > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > since. Moral: design before you implement. > /****************************************************************************/ -- Seth Grimes Alta Plana database & Web / design & development grimes@altaplana.com http://altaplana.com 301-873-8225

For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No other RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability since almost every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. -- Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > Hello all; > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes > per second. > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one > is the best in your opinion? > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that I > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase or > MS Sql-Server, > sorry to people who like them??? > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > Thanks in advance > > > /*************************************************************************** */ > Alla Gribov > alla.gribov@metatel.com > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > since. Moral: design before you implement. > /*************************************************************************** */

Hi, Given your anticipated workload I suggest that you contact some users whose volumes are similar to your expectations and ask them why they chose the RDBMS products they did. In particular contact each of the top ten e-commerce sites (all of whom use Oracle) or, better yet, all of the top fifty e-commerce sites (37 of whom use Oracle). Informix is a sound product which is perceived to be easier to manage than Oracle. It is also perceived as being less expensive. Assuming these perceptions are correct you have to ask yourself why such a high percentage of smart users choose Oracle rather than Informix. Do your own research and be wary of advice offered by users whose total experience with RDBMS may be limited to sites with a couple of dozen users with no significant activity. regards Jerry Gitomer Alla Gribov wrote in message <37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com>... >Hello all; > >First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions >posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > >I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > >I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any >given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. >The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes >per second. > >Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one >is the best in your opinion? > >My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it >seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > >Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that I >am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase or >MS Sql-Server, >sorry to people who like them??? > >Your help is greatly appreciated. > >Thanks in advance > > >/*************************************************************** *************/ > Alla Gribov > alla.gribov@metatel.com >The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh >day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever >since. Moral: design before you implement. >/*************************************************************** *************/

A couple issues I don't see being addressed here are: what hardware platform is this thing going to run on, and what size is the database you'll be putting out there now and later? There are a lot of databases that cross over hardware types, but many don't work as well on one as they do on the other. There are people who swear by DB2 (MVS or UNIX), Terdata, Oracle and Informix. You won't likely get an unbiased opinion. You're talking some fairly large numbers here and I assume that you'll probably be purchasing some hardware to support this system. You might as well select a pair that function well together. Erich Huemoeller Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > Hello all; > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes > per second. > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one > is the best in your opinion? > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that I > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase or > MS Sql-Server, > sorry to people who like them??? > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > Thanks in advance > > > /*************************************************************************** */ > Alla Gribov > alla.gribov@metatel.com > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > since. Moral: design before you implement. > /*************************************************************************** */

Whatever you do - don't use MS Access! :-) ----------------------------------------------- "Don't be suckered in by the comments - debug only the code." To reply by e-mail remove '000' from my address Jerry Gitomer wrote: > > Hi, > > Given your anticipated workload I suggest that you contact > some > users whose volumes are similar to your expectations and ask them > why they chose the RDBMS products they did. In particular > contact > each of the top ten e-commerce sites (all of whom use Oracle) or, > better yet, all of the top fifty e-commerce sites (37 of whom use > Oracle). > > Informix is a sound product which is perceived to be easier > to > manage than Oracle. It is also perceived as being less > expensive. > Assuming these perceptions are correct you have to ask yourself > why such a high percentage of smart users choose Oracle rather > than Informix. > > Do your own research and be wary of advice offered by users > whose total experience with RDBMS may be limited to sites with > a couple of dozen users with no significant activity. > > regards > Jerry Gitomer > > Alla Gribov wrote in message <37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com>... > >Hello all; > > > >First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this > questions > >posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > > >I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > > >I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. > At any > >given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > >The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 > reads/writes > >per second. > > > >Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, > which one > >is the best in your opinion? > > > >My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on > Web, it > >seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > > >Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases > that I > >am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no > Sybase or > >MS Sql-Server, > >sorry to people who like them??? > > > >Your help is greatly appreciated. > > > >Thanks in advance > > > > > >/*************************************************************** > *************/ > > Alla Gribov > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > >The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the > seventh > >day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing > ever > >since. Moral: design before you implement. > >/*************************************************************** > *************/ --

I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do I want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not let such a patently false statement to go by. Magnus Weiman wrote: > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No other > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability since almost > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? Defrag an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does Oracle perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not maintainable, but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' can be performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more easily maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE is DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can think of that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post separately. Art S. Kagel > -- > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > > Hello all; > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes > > per second. > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one > > is the best in your opinion? > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that I > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase or > > MS Sql-Server, > > sorry to people who like them??? > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > */ > > Alla Gribov > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > > since. Moral: design before you implement. > > > /*************************************************************************** > */

I agree with the those 'lot of people'. Informix is absolutely the most powerful and scaleable database server on the market without question and without peer. For supporting large numbers of users well Oracle and Sybase cannot come close. You just have to have the hardware to support the load and Informix will use every erg and byte you give it to stretch performance to the max. Art S. Kagel Alla Gribov wrote: > > Hello all; > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes > per second. > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one > is the best in your opinion? > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that I > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase or > MS Sql-Server, > sorry to people who like them??? > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > Thanks in advance > > /****************************************************************************/ > Alla Gribov > alla.gribov@metatel.com > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > since. Moral: design before you implement. > /****************************************************************************/

I think the writer said Oracle Rdb, which is the Rdb VMS from Digital Equipment Corp. Your comments are about a different database. The statements are essentially correct about Oracle Rdb. Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do I > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not let > such a patently false statement to go by. > > Magnus Weiman wrote: > > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No other > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability since almost > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? Defrag > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does Oracle > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not maintainable, > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' can be > performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more easily > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE is > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can think of > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post > separately. > > Art S. Kagel > > > -- > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > > > Hello all; > > > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes > > > per second. > > > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one > > > is the best in your opinion? > > > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that I > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase or > > > MS Sql-Server, > > > sorry to people who like them??? > > > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > */ > > > Alla Gribov > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > */

Totally wrong!!! I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). This database is very easy to maintain and give you state of the art performance. If you need true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high performance, take a look at Oracle Rdb!! And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, NOT Oracle 7!!! Regards, Magnus Weiman -- Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do I > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not let > such a patently false statement to go by. > > Magnus Weiman wrote: > > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No other > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability since almost > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? Defrag > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does Oracle > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not maintainable, > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' can be > performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more easily > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE is > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can think of > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post > separately. > > Art S. Kagel > > > -- > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > > > Hello all; > > > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes > > > per second. > > > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one > > > is the best in your opinion? > > > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that I > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase or > > > MS Sql-Server, > > > sorry to people who like them??? > > > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > */ > > > Alla Gribov > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > */

You said it! I've worked with Rdb for years (12 years with DEC). I currently work in a mixed Rdb and Oracle shop. There's no comparison. Orace 7 or 8 are not 24*7 databases, Rdb is. In any environment requiring the highest reliability and availability Rdb wins hands down. Too bad Oracle got their hands on it. Magnus Weiman <magnus.weiman@datalogi.com> wrote in message news:Sjdw3.8518$7d.16248@nntpserver.swip.net... > Totally wrong!!! > > I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). This database is > very easy to maintain and give you state of the art performance. If you need > true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high performance, take a > look at Oracle Rdb!! > > And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, NOT Oracle 7!!! > > > Regards, > > Magnus Weiman > > -- > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... > > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do I > > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not let > > such a patently false statement to go by. > > > > Magnus Weiman wrote: > > > > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No other > > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability since > almost > > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. > > > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? Defrag > > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does Oracle > > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not maintainable, > > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' can be > > performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more easily > > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database > > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE is > > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can think of > > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post > > separately. > > > > Art S. Kagel > > > > > -- > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > > > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > > > > Hello all; > > > > > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this questions > > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > > > > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > > > > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At any > > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 reads/writes > > > > per second. > > > > > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which one > > > > is the best in your opinion? > > > > > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, it > > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > > > > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases that > I > > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase > or > > > > MS Sql-Server, > > > > sorry to people who like them??? > > > > > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > > */ > > > > Alla Gribov > > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > > > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the seventh > > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > > */ > >

To all: I apologize to the hardworking developers at DEC who built RDB, which became Oracle Rdb. It is indeed an excellent product and certainly in a class with Informix and DB2 for Enterprise reliability and performance and with Informix for maintainability and configurability. Indeed it's only drawback is the limited number of platforms supported. I had assumed that Magnus was just being sloppy and wrote Oracle Rdb when he meant Oracle RDBMS and so I also apologize to Magnus, mia culpa. Art S. Kagel BC wrote: > > You said it! I've worked with Rdb for years (12 years with DEC). I currently > work in a mixed Rdb and Oracle shop. There's no comparison. Orace 7 or 8 are > not 24*7 databases, Rdb is. In any environment requiring the highest > reliability and availability Rdb wins hands down. Too bad Oracle got their > hands on it. > > Magnus Weiman <magnus.weiman@datalogi.com> wrote in message > news:Sjdw3.8518$7d.16248@nntpserver.swip.net... > > Totally wrong!!! > > > > I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). This database > is > > very easy to maintain and give you state of the art performance. If you > need > > true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high performance, take a > > look at Oracle Rdb!! > > > > And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, NOT Oracle 7!!! > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Magnus Weiman > > > > -- > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > > news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... > > > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do I > > > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not > let > > > such a patently false statement to go by. > > > > > > Magnus Weiman wrote: > > > > > > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No > other > > > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability since > > almost > > > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. > > > > > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? Defrag > > > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does > Oracle > > > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not > maintainable, > > > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' can > be > > > performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more easily > > > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database > > > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE is > > > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can think > of > > > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post > > > separately. > > > > > > Art S. Kagel > > > > > > > -- > > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > > > > > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > > > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > > > > > Hello all; > > > > > > > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this > questions > > > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > > > > > > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > > > > > > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At > any > > > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > > > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 > reads/writes > > > > > per second. > > > > > > > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which > one > > > > > is the best in your opinion? > > > > > > > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, > it > > > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > > > > > > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases > that > > I > > > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase > > or > > > > > MS Sql-Server, > > > > > sorry to people who like them??? > > > > > > > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > > > */ > > > > > Alla Gribov > > > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > > > > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the > seventh > > > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > > > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. > > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > > > */ > > > >

The Oracle sales pitch is better FULL STOP -- _____ Jerry Gitomer <jgitomer@hbsrx.com> wrote in message news:7prgua$gdh$1@autumn.news.rcn.net... > Hi, > > Given your anticipated workload I suggest that you contact > some > users whose volumes are similar to your expectations and ask them > why they chose the RDBMS products they did. In particular > contact > each of the top ten e-commerce sites (all of whom use Oracle) or, > better yet, all of the top fifty e-commerce sites (37 of whom use > Oracle). > > Informix is a sound product which is perceived to be easier > to > manage than Oracle. It is also perceived as being less > expensive. > Assuming these perceptions are correct you have to ask yourself > why such a high percentage of smart users choose Oracle rather > than Informix. > > Do your own research and be wary of advice offered by users > whose total experience with RDBMS may be limited to sites with > a couple of dozen users with no significant activity. > > regards > Jerry Gitomer > > Alla Gribov wrote in message <37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com>... > >Hello all; > > > >First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this > questions > >posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > > >I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > > >I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. > At any > >given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > >The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 > reads/writes > >per second. > > > >Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, > which one > >is the best in your opinion? > > > >My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on > Web, it > >seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > > >Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases > that I > >am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no > Sybase or > >MS Sql-Server, > >sorry to people who like them??? > > > >Your help is greatly appreciated. > > > >Thanks in advance > > > > > >/*************************************************************** > *************/ > > Alla Gribov > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > >The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the > seventh > >day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing > ever > >since. Moral: design before you implement. > >/*************************************************************** > *************/ > >

I strongly disagree with the Statement that Oracle 7 or Oracle 8 are not 24*7 Databases. It is a well known fact that Most of all the Critical Round the Clock Databases (including top Ecommerce sites) in the World use Oracle becos of it's High Availability & Reliability features. -Thiru BC wrote: > You said it! I've worked with Rdb for years (12 years with DEC). I currently > work in a mixed Rdb and Oracle shop. There's no comparison. Orace 7 or 8 are > not 24*7 databases, Rdb is. In any environment requiring the highest > reliability and availability Rdb wins hands down. Too bad Oracle got their > hands on it. > > Magnus Weiman <magnus.weiman@datalogi.com> wrote in message > news:Sjdw3.8518$7d.16248@nntpserver.swip.net... > > Totally wrong!!! > > > > I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). This database > is > > very easy to maintain and give you state of the art performance. If you > need > > true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high performance, take a > > look at Oracle Rdb!! > > > > And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, NOT Oracle 7!!! > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Magnus Weiman > > > > -- > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > > news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... > > > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do I > > > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not > let > > > such a patently false statement to go by. > > > > > > Magnus Weiman wrote: > > > > > > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No > other > > > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability since > > almost > > > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. > > > > > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? Defrag > > > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does > Oracle > > > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not > maintainable, > > > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' can > be > > > performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more easily > > > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database > > > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE is > > > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can think > of > > > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post > > > separately. > > > > > > Art S. Kagel > > > > > > > -- > > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > > > > > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > > > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > > > > > Hello all; > > > > > > > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this > questions > > > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > > > > > > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > > > > > > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At > any > > > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > > > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 > reads/writes > > > > > per second. > > > > > > > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which > one > > > > > is the best in your opinion? > > > > > > > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, > it > > > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > > > > > > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases > that > > I > > > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase > > or > > > > > MS Sql-Server, > > > > > sorry to people who like them??? > > > > > > > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > > > */ > > > > > Alla Gribov > > > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > > > > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the > seventh > > > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > > > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. > > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > > > */ > > > >

Right --- just ask E-Bay... tmgn wrote in message <37C1A0F6.DA1A73EC@excite.com>... >I strongly disagree with the Statement that Oracle 7 or Oracle 8 are not 24*7 >Databases. It is a well known fact that Most of all the Critical Round the Clock >Databases (including top Ecommerce sites) in the World use Oracle becos of it's >High Availability & Reliability features. > >-Thiru > > >BC wrote: > >> You said it! I've worked with Rdb for years (12 years with DEC). I currently >> work in a mixed Rdb and Oracle shop. There's no comparison. Orace 7 or 8 are >> not 24*7 databases, Rdb is. In any environment requiring the highest >> reliability and availability Rdb wins hands down. Too bad Oracle got their >> hands on it. >> >> Magnus Weiman <magnus.weiman@datalogi.com> wrote in message >> news:Sjdw3.8518$7d.16248@nntpserver.swip.net... >> > Totally wrong!!! >> > >> > I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). This database >> is >> > very easy to maintain and give you state of the art performance. If you >> need >> > true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high performance, take a >> > look at Oracle Rdb!! >> > >> > And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, NOT Oracle 7!!! >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Magnus Weiman >> > >> > -- >> > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB >> > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com >> > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden >> > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 >> > Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message >> > news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... >> > > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do I >> > > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not >> let >> > > such a patently false statement to go by. >> > > >> > > Magnus Weiman wrote: >> > > > >> > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No >> other >> > > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability since >> > almost >> > > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. >> > > >> > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? Defrag >> > > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does >> Oracle >> > > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not >> maintainable, >> > > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' can >> be >> > > performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more easily >> > > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database >> > > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE is >> > > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can think >> of >> > > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post >> > > separately. >> > > >> > > Art S. Kagel >> > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB >> > > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com >> > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden >> > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 >> > > > >> > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message >> > > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... >> > > > > Hello all; >> > > > > >> > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this >> questions >> > > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. >> > > > > >> > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development >> > > > > >> > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At >> any >> > > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. >> > > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 >> reads/writes >> > > > > per second. >> > > > > >> > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which >> one >> > > > > is the best in your opinion? >> > > > > >> > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, >> it >> > > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. >> > > > > >> > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases >> that >> > I >> > > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase >> > or >> > > > > MS Sql-Server, >> > > > > sorry to people who like them??? >> > > > > >> > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks in advance >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > >> /*************************************************************************** >> > > > */ >> > > > > Alla Gribov >> > > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com >> > > > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the >> seventh >> > > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever >> > > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. >> > > > > >> > > > >> > >> /*************************************************************************** >> > > > */ >> > >> > >

In comp.databases.informix Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote: > Hello all; OK, I'll throw in my 2 cents ... limiting to DBs with decent marketshare (i.e. you can hire programmers and DBAs with some amount of experience), you have Informix and Oracle (7/8 not rdb). Sorry, DB2 on Unix may be technically sound but I don't think it's all that common (please correct me if i'm wrong). I've actually been DBA on both (currently oracle but for 4+ yrs on Informix) and I'm in full agreement with those that say Informix is better. Practically EVERY DBA activity is easier with Informix. The 'feature list' is pretty much equivalent. In support of ORacle, it's probably easier to find people with Oracle experience. There are probably also better development tools for ORacle as well. Informix sales and marketing seems rather inept as well. Sun is obvious hardware vendor ... as well as SGI if you're comfortable with their future. -Lin PS: obviously, don't use NT or sql-server ...

If they chose Oracle over Rdb on the merits of reliability and availability they were all mistaken. If they chose Oracle over Rdb because of market presence, the inevitable demise of Rdb (at Oracle's hands), the power of PL/SQL and the availability of expertise then they may have made a correct business decision at the expensive of the greater availability and reliability afforded by Rdb. tmgn <tmgn@excite.com> wrote in message news:37C1A0F6.DA1A73EC@excite.com... > I strongly disagree with the Statement that Oracle 7 or Oracle 8 are not 24*7 > Databases. It is a well known fact that Most of all the Critical Round the Clock > Databases (including top Ecommerce sites) in the World use Oracle becos of it's > High Availability & Reliability features. > > -Thiru > > > BC wrote: > > > You said it! I've worked with Rdb for years (12 years with DEC). I currently > > work in a mixed Rdb and Oracle shop. There's no comparison. Orace 7 or 8 are > > not 24*7 databases, Rdb is. In any environment requiring the highest > > reliability and availability Rdb wins hands down. Too bad Oracle got their > > hands on it. > > > > Magnus Weiman <magnus.weiman@datalogi.com> wrote in message > > news:Sjdw3.8518$7d.16248@nntpserver.swip.net... > > > Totally wrong!!! > > > > > > I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). This database > > is > > > very easy to maintain and give you state of the art performance. If you > > need > > > true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high performance, take a > > > look at Oracle Rdb!! > > > > > > And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, NOT Oracle 7!!! > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Magnus Weiman > > > > > > -- > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > > Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > > > news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... > > > > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do I > > > > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not > > let > > > > such a patently false statement to go by. > > > > > > > > Magnus Weiman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No > > other > > > > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability since > > > almost > > > > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. > > > > > > > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? Defrag > > > > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does > > Oracle > > > > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not > > maintainable, > > > > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' can > > be > > > > performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more easily > > > > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database > > > > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE is > > > > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can think > > of > > > > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post > > > > separately. > > > > > > > > Art S. Kagel > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > > > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > > > > > > > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > > > > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > > > > > > Hello all; > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this > > questions > > > > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > > > > > > > > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > > > > > > > > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At > > any > > > > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > > > > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 > > reads/writes > > > > > > per second. > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which > > one > > > > > > is the best in your opinion? > > > > > > > > > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, > > it > > > > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > > > > > > > > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases > > that > > > I > > > > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase > > > or > > > > > > MS Sql-Server, > > > > > > sorry to people who like them??? > > > > > > > > > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > > > > */ > > > > > > Alla Gribov > > > > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > > > > > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the > > seventh > > > > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > > > > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > > > > */ > > > > > > >

There are so many prominent Oracle users for the same reason such a vast majority of the world uses some form of Microsoft Windows on desktop machines. And the reason is not technical advantage. Seth tmgn wrote: > > I strongly disagree with the Statement that Oracle 7 or Oracle 8 are not 24*7 > Databases. It is a well known fact that Most of all the Critical Round the Clock > Databases (including top Ecommerce sites) in the World use Oracle becos of it's > High Availability & Reliability features. > > -Thiru > > BC wrote: > > > You said it! I've worked with Rdb for years (12 years with DEC). I currently > > work in a mixed Rdb and Oracle shop. There's no comparison. Orace 7 or 8 are > > not 24*7 databases, Rdb is. In any environment requiring the highest > > reliability and availability Rdb wins hands down. Too bad Oracle got their > > hands on it. > > > > Magnus Weiman <magnus.weiman@datalogi.com> wrote in message > > news:Sjdw3.8518$7d.16248@nntpserver.swip.net... > > > Totally wrong!!! > > > > > > I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). This database > > is > > > very easy to maintain and give you state of the art performance. If you > > need > > > true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high performance, take a > > > look at Oracle Rdb!! > > > > > > And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, NOT Oracle 7!!! > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Magnus Weiman > > > > > > -- > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > > Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > > > news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... > > > > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do I > > > > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not > > let > > > > such a patently false statement to go by. > > > > > > > > Magnus Weiman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No > > other > > > > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability since > > > almost > > > > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. > > > > > > > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? Defrag > > > > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does > > Oracle > > > > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not > > maintainable, > > > > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' can > > be > > > > performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more easily > > > > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database > > > > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE is > > > > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can think > > of > > > > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post > > > > separately. > > > > > > > > Art S. Kagel > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > > > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > > > > > > > > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > > > > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > > > > > > Hello all; > > > > > > > > > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this > > questions > > > > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > > > > > > > > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > > > > > > > > > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. At > > any > > > > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > > > > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 > > reads/writes > > > > > > per second. > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, which > > one > > > > > > is the best in your opinion? > > > > > > > > > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on Web, > > it > > > > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > > > > > > > > > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases > > that > > > I > > > > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no Sybase > > > or > > > > > > MS Sql-Server, > > > > > > sorry to people who like them??? > > > > > > > > > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > > > > */ > > > > > > Alla Gribov > > > > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > > > > > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the > > seventh > > > > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing ever > > > > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /*************************************************************************** > > > > > */ > > > > > > -- Seth Grimes Alta Plana database & Web / design & development grimes@altaplana.com http://altaplana.com 301-873-8225

Never tried ODBMS ??? They are much faster than Relational Database saving much time of development too. Bye Lvca. * Personal: E-mail: l.garulli@tiscalinet.it HomePage: http://web.tiscalinet.it/garulli * < Orient ODBMS > Project Manager: Home Page: http://orient.freeservers.com << Visit it! E-mail: manager@orient.freeservers.com * Member of Linux User Group - ROME (ITALY) Magnus Weiman wrote in message ... >Totally wrong!!! > >I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). This database is >very easy to maintain and give you state of the art performance. If you need >true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high performance, take a >look at Oracle Rdb!! > >And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, NOT Oracle 7!!! > > >Regards, > >Magnus Weiman > >-- >Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB

Hi, Unfortunately when the server crashes the database becomes unavailable. You have to ask why doesn't E-Bay fix their servers. regards Jerry Gitomer Doug Agnew wrote in message ... >Right --- just ask E-Bay... > >tmgn wrote in message <37C1A0F6.DA1A73EC@excite.com>... >>I strongly disagree with the Statement that Oracle 7 or Oracle 8 are not >24*7 >>Databases. It is a well known fact that Most of all the Critical Round the >Clock >>Databases (including top Ecommerce sites) in the World use Oracle becos of >it's >>High Availability & Reliability features. >> >>-Thiru >> >> >>BC wrote: >> >>> You said it! I've worked with Rdb for years (12 years with DEC). I >currently >>> work in a mixed Rdb and Oracle shop. There's no comparison. Orace 7 or 8 >are >>> not 24*7 databases, Rdb is. In any environment requiring the highest >>> reliability and availability Rdb wins hands down. Too bad Oracle got >their >>> hands on it. >>> >>> Magnus Weiman <magnus.weiman@datalogi.com> wrote in message >>> news:Sjdw3.8518$7d.16248@nntpserver.swip.net... >>> > Totally wrong!!! >>> > >>> > I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). This >database >>> is >>> > very easy to maintain and give you state of the art performance. If you >>> need >>> > true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high performance, >take a >>> > look at Oracle Rdb!! >>> > >>> > And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, NOT Oracle >7!!! >>> > >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > >>> > Magnus Weiman >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB >>> > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com >>> > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden >>> > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 >>> > Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message >>> > news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... >>> > > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do >I >>> > > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not >>> let >>> > > such a patently false statement to go by. >>> > > >>> > > Magnus Weiman wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No >>> other >>> > > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability >since >>> > almost >>> > > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. >>> > > >>> > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? >Defrag >>> > > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does >>> Oracle >>> > > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not >>> maintainable, >>> > > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' >can >>> be >>> > > performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more >easily >>> > > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database >>> > > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE >is >>> > > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can >think >>> of >>> > > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post >>> > > separately. >>> > > >>> > > Art S. Kagel >>> > > >>> > > > -- >>> > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB >>> > > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com >>> > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden >>> > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 >>> > > > >>> > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message >>> > > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... >>> > > > > Hello all; >>> > > > > >>> > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this >>> questions >>> > > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development >>> > > > > >>> > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. >At >>> any >>> > > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. >>> > > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 >>> reads/writes >>> > > > > per second. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, >which >>> one >>> > > > > is the best in your opinion? >>> > > > > >>> > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on >Web, >>> it >>> > > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases >>> that >>> > I >>> > > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no >Sybase >>> > or >>> > > > > MS Sql-Server, >>> > > > > sorry to people who like them??? >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Thanks in advance >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > >>> >/*************************************************************** ************ >>> > > > */ >>> > > > > Alla Gribov >>> > > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com >>> > > > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the >>> seventh >>> > > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing >ever >>> > > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > >>> >/*************************************************************** ************ >>> > > > */ >>> > >>> > >> > >

I dont know about Ebay ..But I know 10000 other 24*7 sites which use Oracle sucessfully .. Every Database will have it's own advantages like Oracle's Performance,Sql Server's Cost Efficiency , Informix's Ease of Administration etc.. I'm not here for any arguements but I simply cannot agree to a Vague claim that Oracle is not a 24*7 technology... -Thiru Jerry Gitomer wrote: > Hi, > > Unfortunately when the server crashes the database becomes > unavailable. You have to ask why doesn't E-Bay fix their > servers. > > regards > Jerry Gitomer > > Doug Agnew wrote in message ... > >Right --- just ask E-Bay... > > > >tmgn wrote in message <37C1A0F6.DA1A73EC@excite.com>... > >>I strongly disagree with the Statement that Oracle 7 or Oracle > 8 are not > >24*7 > >>Databases. It is a well known fact that Most of all the > Critical Round the > >Clock > >>Databases (including top Ecommerce sites) in the World use > Oracle becos of > >it's > >>High Availability & Reliability features. > >> > >>-Thiru > >> > >> > >>BC wrote: > >> > >>> You said it! I've worked with Rdb for years (12 years with > DEC). I > >currently > >>> work in a mixed Rdb and Oracle shop. There's no comparison. > Orace 7 or 8 > >are > >>> not 24*7 databases, Rdb is. In any environment requiring the > highest > >>> reliability and availability Rdb wins hands down. Too bad > Oracle got > >their > >>> hands on it. > >>> > >>> Magnus Weiman <magnus.weiman@datalogi.com> wrote in message > >>> news:Sjdw3.8518$7d.16248@nntpserver.swip.net... > >>> > Totally wrong!!! > >>> > > >>> > I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). > This > >database > >>> is > >>> > very easy to maintain and give you state of the art > performance. If you > >>> need > >>> > true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high > performance, > >take a > >>> > look at Oracle Rdb!! > >>> > > >>> > And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, > NOT Oracle > >7!!! > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > Regards, > >>> > > >>> > Magnus Weiman > >>> > > >>> > -- > >>> > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > >>> > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > >>> > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > >>> > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 > 7440806 > >>> > Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > >>> > news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... > >>> > > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my > intention, nor do > >I > >>> > > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, > I could not > >>> let > >>> > > such a patently false statement to go by. > >>> > > > >>> > > Magnus Weiman wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be > Oracle Rdb. No > >>> other > >>> > > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same > availability > >since > >>> > almost > >>> > > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed > online. > >>> > > > >>> > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to > another? > >Defrag > >>> > > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more > columns? Does > >>> Oracle > >>> > > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is > not > >>> maintainable, > >>> > > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database > maintenance' > >can > >>> be > >>> > > performed online is not true. Informix has always been > FAR more > >easily > >>> > > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of > database > >>> > > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of > TRUNCATE TABLE > >is > >>> > > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance > item I can > >think > >>> of > >>> > > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance > I'll post > >>> > > separately. > >>> > > > >>> > > Art S. Kagel > >>> > > > >>> > > > -- > >>> > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > >>> > > > http://www.datalogi.com > mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > >>> > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > >>> > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 > 70 7440806 > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > >>> > > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > >>> > > > > Hello all; > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you > see this > >>> questions > >>> > > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and > development > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 > million users. > >At > >>> any > >>> > > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the > database. > >>> > > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around > 500 > >>> reads/writes > >>> > > > > per second. > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and > if yes, > >which > >>> one > >>> > > > > is the best in your opinion? > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some > research on > >Web, > >>> it > >>> > > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over > Oracle. > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some > other databases > >>> that > >>> > I > >>> > > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this > project) - no > >Sybase > >>> > or > >>> > > > > MS Sql-Server, > >>> > > > > sorry to people who like them??? > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > Thanks in advance > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> > >/*************************************************************** > ************ > >>> > > > */ > >>> > > > > Alla Gribov > >>> > > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > >>> > > > > The greatest programming project of all took six > days. On the > >>> seventh > >>> > > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug > the thing > >ever > >>> > > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> > >/*************************************************************** > ************ > >>> > > > */ > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > >

I agree. We are into Power Management out here and it is vital to keep the substations etc up that we keep the databases up. We do have a couple of proprietary databases but at a lot of places (in countries like Mexico , Venezuela etc where the skills required for the proprietary databases are not available) we go with Oracle with Replication. It works very well I must say unless you heard about a BIG power outage in any of these countries. Tapan H Trivedi tmgn wrote: > > I dont know about Ebay ..But I know 10000 other 24*7 sites which use > Oracle sucessfully .. Every Database will have it's own advantages like > Oracle's Performance,Sql Server's Cost Efficiency , Informix's Ease of > Administration etc.. > > I'm not here for any arguements but I simply cannot agree to a Vague > claim that Oracle is not a 24*7 technology... > > -Thiru > > Jerry Gitomer wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Unfortunately when the server crashes the database becomes > > unavailable. You have to ask why doesn't E-Bay fix their > > servers. > > > > regards > > Jerry Gitomer > > > > Doug Agnew wrote in message ... > > >Right --- just ask E-Bay... > > > > > >tmgn wrote in message <37C1A0F6.DA1A73EC@excite.com>... > > >>I strongly disagree with the Statement that Oracle 7 or Oracle > > 8 are not > > >24*7 > > >>Databases. It is a well known fact that Most of all the > > Critical Round the > > >Clock > > >>Databases (including top Ecommerce sites) in the World use > > Oracle becos of > > >it's > > >>High Availability & Reliability features. > > >> > > >>-Thiru > > >> > > >> > > >>BC wrote: > > >> > > >>> You said it! I've worked with Rdb for years (12 years with > > DEC). I > > >currently > > >>> work in a mixed Rdb and Oracle shop. There's no comparison. > > Orace 7 or 8 > > >are > > >>> not 24*7 databases, Rdb is. In any environment requiring the > > highest > > >>> reliability and availability Rdb wins hands down. Too bad > > Oracle got > > >their > > >>> hands on it. > > >>> > > >>> Magnus Weiman <magnus.weiman@datalogi.com> wrote in message > > >>> news:Sjdw3.8518$7d.16248@nntpserver.swip.net... > > >>> > Totally wrong!!! > > >>> > > > >>> > I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). > > This > > >database > > >>> is > > >>> > very easy to maintain and give you state of the art > > performance. If you > > >>> need > > >>> > true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high > > performance, > > >take a > > >>> > look at Oracle Rdb!! > > >>> > > > >>> > And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, > > NOT Oracle > > >7!!! > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > Regards, > > >>> > > > >>> > Magnus Weiman > > >>> > > > >>> > -- > > >>> > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > >>> > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > >>> > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > >>> > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 > > 7440806 > > >>> > Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > > >>> > news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... > > >>> > > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my > > intention, nor do > > >I > > >>> > > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, > > I could not > > >>> let > > >>> > > such a patently false statement to go by. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Magnus Weiman wrote: > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be > > Oracle Rdb. No > > >>> other > > >>> > > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same > > availability > > >since > > >>> > almost > > >>> > > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed > > online. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to > > another? > > >Defrag > > >>> > > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more > > columns? Does > > >>> Oracle > > >>> > > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is > > not > > >>> maintainable, > > >>> > > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database > > maintenance' > > >can > > >>> be > > >>> > > performed online is not true. Informix has always been > > FAR more > > >easily > > >>> > > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of > > database > > >>> > > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of > > TRUNCATE TABLE > > >is > > >>> > > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance > > item I can > > >think > > >>> of > > >>> > > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance > > I'll post > > >>> > > separately. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > Art S. Kagel > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > -- > > >>> > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > > >>> > > > http://www.datalogi.com > > mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > > >>> > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > > >>> > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 > > 70 7440806 > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > > >>> > > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > > >>> > > > > Hello all; > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you > > see this > > >>> questions > > >>> > > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and > > development > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 > > million users. > > >At > > >>> any > > >>> > > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the > > database. > > >>> > > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around > > 500 > > >>> reads/writes > > >>> > > > > per second. > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and > > if yes, > > >which > > >>> one > > >>> > > > > is the best in your opinion? > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some > > research on > > >Web, > > >>> it > > >>> > > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over > > Oracle. > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some > > other databases > > >>> that > > >>> > I > > >>> > > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this > > project) - no > > >Sybase > > >>> > or > > >>> > > > > MS Sql-Server, > > >>> > > > > sorry to people who like them??? > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > Thanks in advance > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >/*************************************************************** > > ************ > > >>> > > > */ > > >>> > > > > Alla Gribov > > >>> > > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > > >>> > > > > The greatest programming p

Did anyone tried an Object Database ? They are 10x, 100x and also 1000x faster than relational. When Orient ODBMS will be ready you can try it ... Bye Lvca. * Personal: E-mail: l.garulli@tiscalinet.it HomePage: http://web.tiscalinet.it/garulli * < Orient ODBMS > Project Manager: Home Page: http://orient.freeservers.com << Visit it! E-mail: manager@orient.freeservers.com * Member of Linux User Group - ROME (ITALY) tmgn wrote in message <37C2A72D.B8B2394B@excite.com>... >I dont know about Ebay ..But I know 10000 other 24*7 sites which use >Oracle sucessfully .. Every Database will have it's own advantages like >Oracle's Performance,Sql Server's Cost Efficiency , Informix's Ease of >Administration etc.. > >I'm not here for any arguements but I simply cannot agree to a Vague >claim that Oracle is not a 24*7 technology... > >-Thiru > >Jerry Gitomer wrote: >

30 years ago the saying was that "A datacenter manager never got fired for choosing IBM". Not that it was any better than the competition, but it had a better marketing machine. Today, the same statement can be made about Oracle. Doug Agnew wrote: > Right --- just ask E-Bay... > > tmgn wrote in message <37C1A0F6.DA1A73EC@excite.com>... > >I strongly disagree with the Statement that Oracle 7 or Oracle 8 are not > 24*7 > >Databases. It is a well known fact that Most of all the Critical Round the > Clock > >Databases (including top Ecommerce sites) in the World use Oracle becos of > it's > >High Availability & Reliability features. > > > >-Thiru > > > > > >BC wrote: > > > >> You said it! I've worked with Rdb for years (12 years with DEC). I > currently > >> work in a mixed Rdb and Oracle shop. There's no comparison. Orace 7 or 8 > are > >> not 24*7 databases, Rdb is. In any environment requiring the highest > >> reliability and availability Rdb wins hands down. Too bad Oracle got > their > >> hands on it. > >> > >> Magnus Weiman <magnus.weiman@datalogi.com> wrote in message > >> news:Sjdw3.8518$7d.16248@nntpserver.swip.net... > >> > Totally wrong!!! > >> > > >> > I'm talking about Oracle Rdb (not Oracle 7, not Oracle 8). This > database > >> is > >> > very easy to maintain and give you state of the art performance. If you > >> need > >> > true 24*7 availability, easy maintenance and very high performance, > take a > >> > look at Oracle Rdb!! > >> > > >> > And once again, I'm talking about Oracle Rdb, NOT Oracle8, NOT Oracle > 7!!! > >> > > >> > > >> > Regards, > >> > > >> > Magnus Weiman > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > >> > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > >> > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > >> > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > >> > Art S. Kagel <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > >> > news:37C15E0C.CE0DA8B4@bloomberg.net... > >> > > I'm sorry if this starts an argument, it is not my intention, nor do > I > >> > > want to get into a p**sing match over features. However, I could not > >> let > >> > > such a patently false statement to go by. > >> > > > >> > > Magnus Weiman wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > For this kind of workload, the best option would be Oracle Rdb. No > >> other > >> > > > RDBMS can offer the same performance and the same availability > since > >> > almost > >> > > > every kind of database maintenance can be performed online. > >> > > > >> > > Ever try to move an Oracle table from one tablespace to another? > Defrag > >> > > an Oracle table? Alter a table to drop one or more columns? Does > >> Oracle > >> > > perform in-place Alter Table? I'm not saying Oracle is not > >> maintainable, > >> > > but the statement that 'almost every kind of database maintenance' > can > >> be > >> > > performed online is not true. Informix has always been FAR more > easily > >> > > maintained in this way allowing one to do EVERY kind of database > >> > > maintenance quickly and easily (OK the equivalent of TRUNCATE TABLE > is > >> > > DROP ....; CREATE...; but that's the only maintenance item I can > think > >> of > >> > > that Oracle does better than Informix). On performance I'll post > >> > > separately. > >> > > > >> > > Art S. Kagel > >> > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Name: Magnus Weiman Company: Datalogikonsult AB > >> > > > http://www.datalogi.com mailto:magnus.weiman@datalogi.com > >> > > > S-mail: Box 52, S-590 79 VRETA KLOSTER, Sweden > >> > > > Phone: +46 13 68040 Fax: +46 13 68041 GSM: +46 70 7440806 > >> > > > > >> > > > Alla Gribov <alla.gribov@metatel.com> wrote in message > >> > > > news:37C004E0.24C40572@metatel.com... > >> > > > > Hello all; > >> > > > > > >> > > > > First of all I am apologizing to all of you if you see this > >> questions > >> > > > > posted twice - I am having troubles with sending it. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I need an advice from gurus of database design and development > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I am building a database that will have around 1 million users. > At > >> any > >> > > > > given moment about 5,000 of them are connected to the database. > >> > > > > The chosen database should be able to perform around 500 > >> reads/writes > >> > > > > per second. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Is there a database that can support such a task and if yes, > which > >> one > >> > > > > is the best in your opinion? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > My first thought was Oracle, but after doing some research on > Web, > >> it > >> > > > > seems like that a lot of people prefer Informix over Oracle. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Which would you choose (or may be there are some other databases > >> that > >> > I > >> > > > > am not aware of that would suit better for this project) - no > Sybase > >> > or > >> > > > > MS Sql-Server, > >> > > > > sorry to people who like them??? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Your help is greatly appreciated. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks in advance > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > /*************************************************************************** > >> > > > */ > >> > > > > Alla Gribov > >> > > > > alla.gribov@metatel.com > >> > > > > The greatest programming project of all took six days. On the > >> seventh > >> > > > > day the programmer rested. We've been trying to debug the thing > ever > >> > > > > since. Moral: design before you implement. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > /*************************************************************************** > >> > > > */ > >> > > >> > > >

Y wrote: > > Whatever you do - don't use MS Access! > > :-) > > ----------------------------------------------- I dunno ... I've spent a number of entertaining evenings getting Access to do absolutely nothing useful. In the end, I realized it had taught me to be patient and accept defeat quietly. The Zen of Access Bill :) I miss Alpha4 ... when they got suckered into Windows they exchanged an excellent mid-range database for a miserable Windows product that looked so much like Access that I deleted them both.

Try Lotus Approach. The power of Access with the ease of Alpha4 (easier, actually).