LebGeeks

mir

Member

Oracle VS MSSQL Server

Hello Guys,

i was chatting with KingRhye on MSN. we were talking about the differences between oracle and MSSQLServer (eh.shu hal geeks.. 3abokrit il sobo7 heik conv )

KingRhye says that they are both the same on Performance and close competitors.
and that They're at the same level and both are designed to handle the same load/capacities.

Well i am not an Oracle Expert.. i barely worked couple of hours in my uni lab with oracle.
I am not an MSSQL Server expert too.

but i would like to find out the truth.how much is really the difference? what are the weak points and strong points for each.

the microsoft and oracle sites comparaison are a joke and marketing bullshit
i quote from microsoft website:
"Oracle is years behind Microsoft and other companies on security,"
"I think Oracle is an amateur when it comes to security right now."

I will also ask my oracle friends about the differences.. w i will post their replies.
maybe i can come up with a good conclusion

Thank you for your feedback min halla2, really appreciate it
w don't make it a topic for flaming

KingRhye

Member

Re: Oracle VS MSSQL Server

I speak the truth.. don't you believe me ?

rolf

Member

Re: Oracle VS MSSQL Server

You're an SQL junkie ;)

teodorgeorgiev

Member

Re: Oracle VS MSSQL Server

Oracle (till 8) was a great product. Very powerful. Indeed, all (90%) large telecoms (proper line and mobile) use Oracle as a database. One of the most popular billing software packages (used by PTTs, mobile operators, large Internet operators and etc) ---> MIND CTI uses Oracle.

In my personal opinion (I am not a DBA or something) Oracle was the superior product till version 8. In 9/9i they shitted too much and MS-SQL 2000 is now a better product. But in matter of stability and performance, Oracle under Solaris (with SUN Sparc) puts MS-SQL to its knees.

This is based on REAL experience, not reading websites or comparisons or rumours.

mir

Member

Re: Oracle VS MSSQL Server

I think i am getting a more clearer Picture about the DBs :

Platform comparison
-- SQL Server 2000 only works on Windows-based platforms, including Windows 9x, Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows CE.
-- Oracle 9i Database supports all known platforms, including Windows-based platforms, AIX-Based Systems, Compaq Tru64 UNIX, HP 9000 Series HP-UX, Linux Intel, Sun Solaris and so on.
The Multi-Platform is a big issue to be considered...

Results are from The Transaction Processing Performance Counsil (TPC) [a sort of Independent and free Organization]
TPC-C is an on-line transaction processing benchmark
       1 - IBM DB2 UDB 8.2        (3,210,540 tpmC) wow
       2 - Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition (1,601,784 tpmC)       
       3 - Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Enterprise Edt SP1 (1,231,433 tpmC0 (the 2005.. the 2000 is at Rank 10 )
Lol non of oracle or Mssql is the winner here

TPC-H is an ad-hoc, decision support benchmark.
100 GB:
      1-Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Enterprise x64 Edition
      2-IBM DB2 UDB 8.1
10 000 GB
     1 -Oracle 10g Enterprise Ed R2 w/ Partitioning
     2-IBM DB2 UDB 8.2 OS

...blablabla there are other stats.. http://www.tpc.org

-- on Several Websites PL/SQL is more powerful than T-SQL

-- In SQL Server, all pages (blocks) are always 8k and all extents are always 8 pages (64k). This means you have no way to specify larger extents to ensure contiguous space for large objects.

-- In SQL Server, the DBA has no "real" control over sorting and cache memory allocation. The memory allocation is decided only globally in the server properties memory folder, and that applies for ALL memory and not CACHING, SORTING, etc.

-- The main problem of the MSSQL 2000 compared with Oracle 8i/9i for VLDB/OLTP and enterprise applications on the high-end machines was the well-known MSSQL locking strategy.However, i heard that some locking issue are solved in the new 2005 thing..

Well there are lot of other stuff.. bas i think the conclusion would be there is nothing better..
it depends on the programmer how he uses it and how much someone is willing to pay
i am tired.. sorry for the long post

Last edited by mir (May 11 2006)

KingRhye

Member

Re: Oracle VS MSSQL Server

mir, note that each test is a separate one and have been conducted on different server types/platforms/application etc... so it's more of an individual benchmark test than a comparison test.

KingRhye

Member

Re: Oracle VS MSSQL Server

The other topic is locked, and I got 2 things to say:
1- to Samer: the way you locked the other topic is very wrong and unpro.
2- to Ragnar: always a funny dude heh.. you still believe CStr() converts a pointer variable to a string value ?

This forum obviously has poor management, and with dumbshits like google-and-science-fair-freak Ragnar in it, I'm outtie again :)

Ragnar78

Member

Re: Oracle VS MSSQL Server

Thank god, its the only time you appeared intelligent froggy.
But hey, how can you be so intelligent and not have any reference, any application you developped, any job...?

You think you are a geek programmer and your dumb enough not to do anything.

I developped and sold a Sniper for auctions on eBay.fr. Fully done in VB. What did you do? still waiting for references. Your just a book froggy...go back to your books.

samer

Admin

Re: Oracle VS MSSQL Server

1- to Samer: the way you locked the other topic is very wrong and unpro.

Flaming is the last thing i want in this forum.

his forum obviously has poor management

too bad.

mir

Member

Re: Oracle VS MSSQL Server

note that each test is a separate one and have been conducted on different server types/platforms/application etc... so it's more of an individual benchmark test than a comparison test.

Umm... OK.. ur right.

I think each of the DBMS is best  suited for some Kinda use...
I will no longer think or post about this here :S