Oracle v SQL Server

[calahans]

I was wondering what people say as the relative merit of these two RDBMS. I have worked for the last few years with SQL Server and found it very (well before version 7.0 it was a large access database!).

For the last 6 months I have been using Oracle and have found some really good features. It hard to judge which is the better, but I feel that MS may still be slightly behind, especially since Oracle is integrating alot of Java extensions into some of it later release.

On a related note, I read somewhere that DB2 was at the top of the performance tables...

What do others think?



Cal

 

[foxdev]

Obviously, this is going to be one heckuva discussion because better is very subjective in this comparison. Not subjective in the sense that ProductA supports 255 columns per table and ProductB supports 1024 columns per table, but subjective in the sense that each has strengths and weaknesses that may be important to each of us in the tasks we have to do, but may not matter one iota to the next person.

Case in point: SQLS comes with OLAP in the box; with Oracle, you have to pay extra for it. Most of us will not use OLAP, so its a trivial difference.

From my 3 years of SQL Server experience and brief Oracle experience, here is my opinion in a nutshell (some say I'm a nut with an opinion):

[tab]Most, especially those relatively new in database servers, will find SQLS much easier to manage.

Robert Bradley

http://www.foxdev.com/