October 5, 2007 at 6:46 am
Well, by tha way, how is SQLServer better than Oracle?
You say that SQLServer has now some feature that Oracle 8i had in the 2000.
Partitioning, Performance,...where SQLServer is better?
I think you trying to say that there is no difference between Oracle and MSQL, not that MSSQL is better; anyway I don't think so and if I would like to write something about this topic, I surely will find some interesting to write.
October 5, 2007 at 7:07 am
You don't understand the difference here. Oracle has more functionality. Agreed! But is it a better product? I don't think so.
When I was an Oracle Admin, I got called NO LESS than 5x per week off hours. I got called into the office say 5x per month for critical issues.
Now these issues were often with new applications, and over time, the problems would get worked out. We would find the hint for the SQL, or the hidden setting in the init.ora (spfile) to enable some functionality that was needed for our situation, but it would take time.
We now change our application weekly, and in the past 6 months. I have had only 1 situation that required some minor investigation to solve an issue.
My point is that although it isn't flashy it does reliably do what you expect it to do. That is not the case with Oracle, it won't even run the same command the same way from hour to hour.
10g is finally doing statistics changes based upon inserts/updates to data. SQL Server did that in 2000 🙂 or older. Kind of like a Hyundai and a Ferrari. One is a lot flashier, but one needs a lot more care to keep running.
October 5, 2007 at 9:50 am
Somebody asked why all the jokes and why very little substance.
Short answer: This type of comparison is a joke.
Oracle, MSSQL, and MySQL all do database. They all do it differently, sort of. Each has areas where they excel and areas where they suck.
ATBCharles Kincaid
October 5, 2007 at 10:40 am
It's a JOKE
No it wasn't... I hate Oracle 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 5, 2007 at 10:55 am
Vladimiro Buda (10/5/2007)
Well, by tha way, how is SQLServer better than Oracle?You say that SQLServer has now some feature that Oracle 8i had in the 2000.
Partitioning, Performance,...where SQLServer is better?
I think you trying to say that there is no difference between Oracle and MSQL, not that MSSQL is better; anyway I don't think so and if I would like to write something about this topic, I surely will find some interesting to write.
Try each of the following in both Oracle and just about any version of SQL Server... then, you'll understand why all the Oracle bad mouthing...
Start off with updating a table using data in other tables to do the update. Use UPDATE and not the new friendlier MERGE.
Write a trigger that isn't RBAR.
Write an audit trigger for a really big table... see if 32k bytes will get you there.
Create a table with a table name or column name more than 30 characters. Do the same for stored procedures, triggers and views.
Put an "&" in the comments or a string literal and try to run without making any special settings.
Write a stored proc to return a result set to a GUI.
Write a stored proc that takes named parameters and call it.
Try running something like the following for troubleshooting purposes...
SELECT Current_TimeStamp
Try printing the results of a stored proc or a set of variables either for reporting purposes or troubleshooting.
Drop and create a temporary working table... without committing any data.
Truncate a table from within a stored proc.
Use the provided documentation to find out about LIKE (or just about anything else).
And, that's just the tip of the proverbial ice-berg. :hehe:
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 5, 2007 at 11:02 am
David Russell (10/4/2007)
I know I'm not the brightest spark in the universe but what is the point of reproducing audibly, via the Audio (MP3) click, what is written in the email? I expected more, at least some valid reasons rather than jokey trivialities.
Heh... I thought the same thing about Oracle... I expected more. 😉
The reason for all the jokes is because if you don't joke about it, Oracle will make you cry... 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 5, 2007 at 2:19 pm
Oracle can run on UNIX, Main Frame VAX/VMS, IBM OS, Window and SQL Server can only run on window. It is a big deal for some companies when they have amount of transactions and they need to use other operating system instead of Window to handle it.
Actually I started as an Oracle developer, it was nice in one way. Every time I needed to change the database, I just had to call the DBA. I did not have to worry about user security and many other things since the DBA would take care of them.
Now I am SQL Server developer, my company did not even hire a DBA and I had to do the DBA work myself. Actually I don't know it is good or bad.:exclamationmark:
October 5, 2007 at 2:32 pm
It is disingenuous to say SQL Server 2005 is the same as Oracle 8i because Oracle have spent more than 20 billion dollars to compete with Microsoft by buying Microsoft Gold partner in Fulltext, MySQL DRI enabled file system and Hyperion the top Calculus tool. Why MySQL engine gives Oracle an easy way to create Oracle express but I still want a developer edition. There is no fulltext in Oracle, SQL Server from 7.0 comes with improving fulltext.
Now some of the things Jeff is talking about are fixed in .NET development because yes you can now create a single table web page without code. But you have to use 9i and above client to use 8i because very strange things happen when you use 8i client to connect to 8i in all versions of .NET. The one I want them to fix like yesterday is new Oracle versions blocking connection to previous versions and you will not know what is causing it if your employer is too cheap to pay for a Metalink account. And 9i problems comes from too many C++ compilers in the root directory one from IBM and another from Oracle. Both products comes with benefits based on business needs because I worked for a company that used Oracle for the backend and used SQL Server for the calculus end of the same application.
Kind regards,
Gift Peddie
October 8, 2007 at 2:12 am
Certainly in sql server is easier to visualize information, but oracle provides a lot more information to help a dba figure out what went wrong. In my company oracle is used to handle heavy loads (massive data r/w) while sql server is used for applications that require lots of connections/transactions. The working hours here are 24x7 so I must say they both perform very well when properly configured for their specific tasks.;)
October 8, 2007 at 5:21 pm
We handle some pretty heavy loads, as well, but on the SQL Server side... that is, when folks stop trying to write Oracle code for SQL Server 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
October 9, 2007 at 7:16 pm
All this talk, and nobody says anything (good or bad) about DB2...
One good thing about knowing Oracle and SQL Server (and DB2, mySQL...), there is always work to find somewhere!
October 9, 2012 at 6:39 am
Why SQL Server is better than Oracle? It isn't even an argument. Oracle is probably 10 years ahead of SQL and I think that says it all.
October 9, 2012 at 6:43 am
rcheneyjr (10/9/2007)
All this talk, and nobody says anything (good or bad) about DB2...One good thing about knowing Oracle and SQL Server (and DB2, mySQL...), there is always work to find somewhere!
I'll be happy to say something nice about DB2 - My first taste of SQL as a language was learning how to do basic commands against DB2 on an IBM Mainframe. Back in the 90's, it was a command line interface run via TSO on a dumb terminal. An online course provided by my employer at the time. Most of the doors in my career since then have been opened by learning SQL on DB2. So, for that I have nothing but good memories of that particular database.
And no, I'm not a particular fan of Oracle, either, for one reason - Case Insensitive. Sure, you could code around it, but make just one error capitalizing or not capitalizing a letter, and solving it could be like looking for a needle in a haystack. But in all the times I did use it, when used right it performed well. Most of my career has evolved to using SQL Server, so I tend to stick with what brings home the paycheck.
October 9, 2012 at 6:53 am
Years ago I was a production DBA for Oracle but these days its all development work. My biggest gripe about Oracle is that getting data out of it is like getting blood from a rock.
Cheers
October 9, 2012 at 7:46 am
Speaking different SQL dialects is no problem for me, I routinely work with about four of them. But beware that Oracle thinks '' is NULL. It may seem like a small thing, but it's a sneaky little trap.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 90 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply