Re: Microsoft SQL vs. Informix 7.12 OWS for Win NT

On 21 Dec 96 at 1:15, Scott P. Smith wrote: > MS SQL installed with 0 problems. I was able to create a database and > tables within 2 hours after opening the box. I installed the "Netscape" (OWS, Enterprise server, LiveWire Pro) package and I was able to create tables within 30 minutes of completing the download. > Informix took 3 complete installs before properly installing and each > install took 2 to 3 times as long as the MS SQL install. After the first > two installs, trying to log into the server would cause crashes. Here I can't argue. The symptoms I got were different (no crashes, just didn't work), but we've installed OWS 3 times (once in house, twice at clients) and outside the office we've had to install at least twice each time. The install did seem to take forever, but that's because I'm used to that horrid and unfriendly old Unix install which means I can get OnLine up and running in 15-20 minutes... :-) > Accessing MS SQL from a client using ODBC worked great. Again, I was able > to edit/add records within a hour of installing the client side software. > MS SQL supports a number of net protocols and had no problem finding the > SQL server on the network. Ah - never tried this explicitly. > As I write this I still can't access Informix from a client. It only > supports TCP access (as far as I can tell) and requires editing files > manually on the client (the Services file). Hm. It should, by default, set up a service file entry for you automatically (turbo 1526/tcp - check the end of the file). Is there some other kind of access other than TCP? :-) > Finally, Informix seems at least 20 times slower (yes that's twenty, not a > typo) when performing operations on the server (like creating databases, > tables, etc.). What about data access? I can only compare our 486 SCO Unix with OnLine 5 against Pentium 133 NT OWS, and *everything* seems slow as hell on NT, not just OWS. When we're actually doing queries and things like that, the machine seems fast enough. > What gives? Up until now I've always heard that MS SQL is immature, > unstable, not robust, etc. and that Informix is stable, scaleable, etc. Yes, but this is running on Microsnot... :-) > Maybe Informix only has problems on NT. I would appreciate any > comments/explanation. Maybe I'm just dumb because I've worked with Unix all my life, but I really think NT sucks. There doesn't appear to be any consistency with Win 3.x, Win'95 or any other OS that we've ever come across. Installation by means of a nice GUI is really neat - when it works. Unfortunately, if something goes wrong you seem to be in infinitely more trouble than under the boring old manual install approach. Sorry, I'll just go take my medication now... -- Ciao, Billy I'd be in favour of apathy, but I just couldn't be bothered...