at lease 10 difference between oracle 8i and sql server 2000

8/8/2019 At Lease 10 Difference Between Oracle 8i and SQL Server 2000

1/26

At lease 10 difference between oracle 8i and sql server2000?

greenspun.com :LUSENET : OpenKnowledge : One Thread

Top of Form

Google Search

Bottom of Form

Can you mail me at lease 10 difference between oracle 8i and sql server 2000?

-- chandra sekhara reddy.m ([email protected]), November 07, 2001

Answers

Will mail you soon as possible.

-- SVR.ARVIND ([email protected]), December 31, 2001.

pl send the difference between oracle 8i and sql server 2000 more over advantage anddisadvantage of oracle & sql Server

-- Sunil kumar ([email protected]), January 31, 2002.

I dont know the answer

-- Roopak kumar sahoo ([email protected]), February 23, 2002.

plz mail me as soon as possable .. thanx

-- anna ([email protected]), April 07, 2002.

No idea..!Hungry to know about the fact..!

-- S.Prasad Panda ([email protected]), April 23, 2002.

Security is high in Oracle. And it will work fine in any environments like UNIX,

SOLARIES OR WINDOWS-NT. Where as SQL SERVER performs more onWINDOWS-NT only. There are certain futures which one will miss, if he uses SQLSERVER without Windiws-NT server.

Thanks.

-- Prasad Panda ([email protected]), April 24, 2002.
http://www.greenspun.com/http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/index.tclhttp://www.greenspun.com/bboard/index.tclhttp://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic=OpenKnowledgemailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.greenspun.com/bboard/index.tclhttp://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic=OpenKnowledgemailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.greenspun.com/


2/26

You Cannot connect the database which is running in the Windows95 from an NTNetwork.

-- Ravi ([email protected]), July 04, 2002.

plz i want to difference between sql and oracle kindly help me.

-- asif khan ([email protected]), July 10, 2002.

Plz I want too. thanks

-- pejetaji ([email protected]), August 25, 2002.

what is the difrence betweem the SQL server and Oracol

-- Basma Tobia ([email protected]), October 15, 2002.

what is the advantage and disadvantage of SQL server and Oracle

-- Nassir Gappy ([email protected]), October 16, 2002.

SQL Server is usually easier to setup/configure, and get going - especially in terms ofintegrating into other Microsoft applications.

-- Sanjeev ([email protected]), December 05, 2002.

What is the difference between MS SQL Server and Oracle??

-- Tanvir Hussain chatha ([email protected]), February 18, 2003.

1. Oracle runs on many platforms, SQL on Windows only 2. Oracle includes IFS(Internet File System), Java integration, SQL is more of a pure database 3. Oraclerequires client install and setup (Not difficult, but very UNIX-like for Windows users)4. SQL is #1 in Cost/Performance and overall Performance, although Oracle will

refute that 5. Replication is much easier in SQL (I have been at clients where even theOracle consultant couldn't get it working w/oracle) 6. Failover support in SQL ismuch, much easier 7. JDBC support is much better in Oracle, although Microsoft isworking on it 8. ODBC support in both 9. SQL is ANSI-SQL '92 compliant, making iteasier to convert to another ANSI compliant database, theoretically anyway (truth isevery database has proprietary extensions). Oracle is generally more proprietary andtheir main goal is to keep their customers locked-in. 10. SQL natively supports
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


3/26

ODBC, OLEDB, XML, XML Query, XML updates. Oracle natively supportsproprietary connections, JDBC. Not sure about XML support though. 11. SQL Serveris much easier to administrate, with GUI and command- line tools. Most of Oracle iscommand-line (Back in SQL 6.5 days I had a customer who was so proud that after aday's worth of work he had managed to script his database. I showed him how it was a

3 click operation in SQL ;-) 12. Oracle requires add-ons for transaction monitors,failover, etc. SQL has COM+, uses NT clustering and generally has everything built-in 13. SQL Analysis Services is included (A very powerful OLAP server). For Oracleit is a separate purchase.

Hope this helps some.

-- mark ([email protected]), March 01, 2003.

Is the query language the same for sql server 2000 and oracle? What is the differencebetween pl/sql and sql?

-- Sukhbir Singh ([email protected]), March 18, 2003.

Is the sql ,pl/sql same on sql server and Oracle?

-- Mamatha Yelwal ([email protected]), March 26, 2003.

could you please tell me the difference between oracle 7,8,8i,9,11

-- Pradeep Ragupathy ([email protected]), March 27, 2003.

Oracle will be used especially in large database. But if we use sql server in such aenvironment, the data processing will become very slower. Oracle database veryclosely supports Java rather than Sql server.

-- V.Muralidharan ([email protected]), April 07, 2003.

Oracle 7 was RDBMS, i.e it was a relation database and the one's after that i.e. 8onwards Oracle introduced the concept of OODBMS. Which stands for Object

Oriented Database Management Systems. With every major release Oracle hasinitiated a lot of changes for the better. Like (1) Getting PL/SQL closer to ANSI SQLstandards (2) Automatic Management of Undo from 9i onwards (3) Introduction ofspecial Grouping operators for queries (4) ISQL env for easier query processing (5)RAC (I dunno much about it) (6) AS(Application Server, integrated into thedatabase)
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


4/26

-- humdum ([email protected]), April 23, 2003.

SQL server GUI is easy to work. SQL serever is easy to maintain. Orcal dataprocssing is very good compared to SQL server

-- C.N.Jha ([email protected]), July 04, 2003.

PLEASE SEND 10 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ORACLE SQLSERVER2000

-- SUNITHAMADHUSUDHAN ([email protected]), July14, 2003.

Here is a brief comparison between Oracle 9i and SQL Server 2000. Platformdependancy SQL Server is only operable on the Windows platform, a major limitation

for it to be an enterprise solution. Oracle is available on multiple platforms such asWindows, all flavors of Unix from vendors such as IBM, Sun, Digital, HP, Sequent,etc. and VAX-VMS, as well as MVS. The multi-platform nature of Oracle makes it atrue enterprise solution. Locking and concurrency SQL Server has no multi-versionconsistency model, which means that "writers block readers and readers blockwriters" to ensure data integrity. In contrast, with Oracle, the rule is "readers don'tblock writers and writers don't block readers." This is possible without compromisingdata integrity because Oracle will dynamically re-create a read-consistent image for areader of any requested data that has been changed but not yet committed. In otherwords, the reader will see the data as it was before the writer began changing it (until

the writer commits). SQL Server's locking scheme is much simpler (less mature) andwill result in a lot of delays/waits in a heavy OLTP environment. Also, SQL Serverwill escalate row locks to page level locks when too many rows on a page are locked.This locks rows which are uninvolved in any updates for no good reason. Performanceand tuning a. In SQL Server, the DBA has no "real" control over sorting and cachememory allocation. The memory allocation is decided only globally in the serverproperties memory folder, and that applies for ALL memory and not CACHING,SORTING, etc. b. 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 contiguousspace for large objects. c. No range partioning of large tables and indexes. In Oracle, a

large 100 GB table can be seamlessly partitioned at the database level into rangepartitions. For example, an invoice table can be partitioned into monthly partitions.Such partitioned tables and partitioned indexes give performance and maintenancebenefits and are transparent to the application. d. There is no partitioning in SQLServer. e. There are no bitmap indexes in SQL Server. f. There are no reverse keyindexes in SQL Server. g. There are no function-based indexes in SQL Server. h.There is no star query optimization in SQL Server. Object types Here are some objecttypes missing in SQL Server that exist in Oracle. a. You cannot declare public or
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


5/26

private synonyms. b. There is no such thing as independent sequence objects. c. Thereare no packages; i.e., collections of procedures and functions. d. No "before" eventtriggers (only "after" event triggers) and no row triggers (only statement). e. No objecttypes like in PL/SQL. PL/SQL versus T-SQL a. In T-SQL there are significantextensions to the ANSI SQL-92 standard which means converting applications to a

different database later will be a code challenge re-write. The INNER JOIN, LEFTOUTER, RIGHT OUTER JOIN syntax differs from the classic JOIN. b. No Javadatabase engine as in Oracle. c. Stored procedures in SQL Server are not compileduntil executed (which means overhead, late binding and finding errors at executiontime only!). d. No ability to read/write from external files from a stored procedure. e.PL/SQL has many DBMS system packages, where T-SQL relies only on a limitednumber of extended and system stored procedures in the master database. f. PL/SQLis better in error exception handling, and there is no such thing as exceptions in T-SQL (T-SQL uses @@error -- not elegant!). g. T-SQL does not have the MINUSoperator, that makes finding schema differences more difficult in SQL Server. h. In

SQL Server there is no "dead connection detection". Clients who lose their connectionmay still hold locks until a DBA is notified to kill their server side processes. i. InSQL Server there is no such thing as SQL*NET aliases/service names! This meansapplications have to hard code the actual server name into their apps, making itdifficult to move databases later to load balance across servers. Clustering technologyIn clustering technology, Oracle is light years ahead, since SQL Server has nothinglike Oracle Parallel Server/RAC -- two instances acting on the same data in active-active configurations. And with the new version of Parallel Server in Oracle 9i,renamed as the Oracle Real Application Clusters, there is diskless contention handlingof read-read, read-write, write-read, and write-write contention between the instances.

This diskless contention handling is called Cache Fusion, and it means for the firsttime, any application can be placed in a cluster without any changes, and it scalesupwards by just adding another machine to the cluster. Microsoft has nothing like this.Reliability a. In SQL Server Standard Edition there is no ability to mirror thetransaction log files. In Enterprise Edition there is a log shipping process that is not soreliable. b. If the logs fill up the disk, the database will crash hard. c. Sometimes thisrequires the server itself to be rebooted. Summary SQL Server is clearly positionedbetween Microsoft Access and Oracle in terms of functionality, performance andscalability. It is a good workgroup-level solution, a very quick time to marketsolution, and is very simple to use and administer. Oracle is much more advanced andhas more to offer for larger applications with both OLTP and data warehouseapplications. Its new clustering features are ideal for Application Service Providers(ASPs) on the Internet, who can now start with a cluster of two small servers andgrow by just adding a server when they need to.

-- G.Subramani ([email protected]), July 30, 2003.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


6/26

What always amazes me is how many Oracle folks say SQL Server does not have thisand that and our Oracle does all of this. Most of this is bullshit. The true is that manythings can be accomplished differently in different databases and environments and itdoes not make sense to compare apples and oranges. Just to give you some ideas,when they say SQL server does not read/write files they forget to say that SQL Server

does support extended stored procedures, using these procedures you can do file/writeand virtually anything else that you can do in Windows and beyond. When they saySQL Server does not support Java, they forget to say that virtually nobody runningSQL Servers wants to have slow and ugly Java (defeating the relational databaseconcept) in their database and so on. This comparison is endless and has no real sense.Do not compare apples and oranges just because all of them are called fruits.

-- Forget it ([email protected]), August 05, 2003.

yes i do agree with forget it as mentioned above. otherwise if there would have been

such a drastic differences showing one is mightier then the other would not havesurvived the market share ...and sql server is still there ..;-)

geniemani

-- geniemani ([email protected]), September 05, 2003.

hi send me diffrances

-- ashish saxena ([email protected]), September 07, 2003.

Hi Forget it,That was a nice analysis by subramani!. You are forgetting that he was onlyresponding to the question about differences between SQL server and Oracle but nottrying (to sell oracle and to demean SQL server). For example if you read any carbuying guide, it will list out what is there in one model car and what is not therecompared to another model. Some body might have a personal bias towards aparticular vendor.

But remember that if we are not good with all the products(rdbms) , and stick to ourfavourite one ---we will perish like an apple/orange in this market;).

-- murali ([email protected]), September 08, 2003.

For supporting a different point of view:

http://www.xefteri.com/articles/17mar2003/default.aspx
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


7/26

http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/compare/pricecomparison.asp


http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/compare/mythandreality.asp


I agree with Murali([email protected]).His answer is absolutely correct.I hopeMr.Forget it will realize this

-- kvm ([email protected]), September 10, 2003.

Hello Friends, Can any one give me the difference b/w oracle 8i and 9i

Thanks-- R ([email protected]), September 11, 2003.

1i

-- Kabir Islam ([email protected]), September 18, 2003.

Caching in Oracle in the lites of PCTs is much better and powerfull than in that ofSQL server.Also you can get the source code of Oracle!!

-- Amber R Marfatia ([email protected]), October 16, 2003.

unrelated

-- ([email protected]), October 18, 2003.

Yes. Oracle is like apple and Sql Server is like Orange. For a Poor man Orange is

better and for a rich man apple is better.

-- Michael Manoj ([email protected]), November 21, 2003.

What about SQL Servers DTS capabilities? No one rating these? I favour SQL Serverfor small quick business solutions on a budget, and Oracle for large scalable bigbudget solutions.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://dailyislaam.pitas.com/sayyidina_mawlana_abu_bakr_siddeeq_radhi_allaahu_anh.htmlhttp://dailyislaam.pitas.com/sayyidina_mawlana_abu_bakr_siddeeq_radhi_allaahu_anh.htmlmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://dailyislaam.pitas.com/sayyidina_mawlana_abu_bakr_siddeeq_radhi_allaahu_anh.htmlmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


8/26

-- oracsqlserve ([email protected]), December 22, 2003.

1. Oracle runs on many platforms, SQL on Windows only 2. Oracle includes IFS(Internet File System), Java integration, SQL is more of a pure database 3. Oracle

requires client install and setup (Not difficult, but very UNIX-like for Windows users)4. SQL is #1 in Cost/Performance and overall Performance, although Oracle willrefute that 5. Replication is much easier in SQL (I have been at clients where even theOracle consultant couldn't get it working w/oracle) 6. Fail over support in SQL ismuch, much easier 7. JDBC support is much better in Oracle, although Microsoft isworking on it 8. ODBC support in both 9. SQL is ANSI-SQL '92 compliant, making iteasier to convert to another ANSI compliant database, theoretically anyway (truth isevery database has proprietary extensions). Oracle is generally more proprietary andtheir main goal is to keep their customers locked-in. 10. SQL natively supportsODBC, OLEDB, XML, XML Query, XML updates. Oracle natively supports

proprietary connections, JDBC. Not sure about XML support though. 11. SQL Serveris much easier to administrate, with GUI and command- line tools. Most of Oracle iscommand-line (Back in SQL 6.5 days I had a customer who was so proud that after aday's worth of work he had managed to script his database. I showed him how it was a3 click operation in SQL ;-) 12. Oracle requires add-ons for transaction monitors, failover, etc. SQL has COM+, uses NT clustering and generally has everything built-in13. SQL Analysis Services is included (A very powerful OLAP server). For Oracle itis a separate purchase. 14. Security is high in Oracle. And it will work fine in anyenvironments like UNIX, SOLARIES OR WINDOWS-NT. Where as SQL SERVERperforms more on WINDOWS-NT only. There are certain futures which one will

miss, if he uses SQL SERVER without Windiws-NT server. 15. Oracle will be usedespecially in large database. But if we use sql server in such a environment, the dataprocessing will become very slower. Oracle database very closely supports Java ratherthan Sql server.

-- lakshmi ([email protected]), December 24, 2003.

dfsdf

-- sdfd ([email protected]), January 19, 2004.

Thank you very much :) all of you .. becuase of this healthy discussion i have knownfew facts relating to the differnece b/w then .. I think we should give credit toSubramani who had very good points and did hard work to let us know things ..thankx alot you


9/26


10/26

readers, and the most aggressive can have readers block writers. In classic RDBMSthis is not too bad - but in complex deep relations such as OORDBMS-over-RDBMSor other object-graph storage solutions, deadlocks can really hurt your project unlessyou can scale some queries back to Read Committed isolation level.

-- David Goldstein ([email protected]), March 15, 2004.

Oh yes!!! One more thing:Oracle will not index null values (for compound indexes, that means all values nullproduces no entry).SQL will index all rows.On Oracle this can be an advantage for large tables where columns are often null butyou want to find the non-null values quickly; but is a terrible disadvantage if you needto find null values (it produces a table scan).On SQL sometimes you wish you could ignore nulls (but I believe they dropped that

option long ago); but you almost never get surprised by those nasty table scans.

-- David Goldstein ([email protected]), March 15, 2004.

1.Oracle is platform independent 2.Oracle has in built jvm we can include java classesinto it. 3.Sql server has better gui than oracle 4.Sql server has better perfomance inbackups,replication,recovery 5.There is no synonym database object in sql server,nopackage no row trigger,no before trigger. 6.oracle has better querry processing 7.oracle has better internet computing 8.sql server is easy to use with ms platforms

9.oracle has more powerfull pl/sql 10.oracle is better for large database.

-- Gagan jaiswal ([email protected]), March 31, 2004.

bhen ke loudo saaleyo padh nahi sakte apne aap aur yaha aake answer maangte ho....aur madarchodo search karna bhi nahi aata tumhe... bhosdi walo kehne ko comp.engg. kar rahe par searching nahi aati.. jab kaam karne lagoge waha pe bhi kya gaandmarwaoge kya ... aisi hi sites pe jaake plz plz karke answer mangoge......tumhari maabhen di ta mai... Gaand marao saalo

-- Tiger ([email protected]), April 05, 2004.

Are yar tiger ... kya tune e londo ko bahut galiya diya. Are thoda shikhade ne yar..Apne desh ka nam roshan karenge.

-- Sanjay ([email protected]), April 14, 2004.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


11/26

The following article compares Oracle versus Microsoft SQL Server 2000. Ithighlights most of the SQL Server technical limitations, and in the same time givesthe corresponding Oracle solutions to these limitations.

The article could be helpful, to anyone trying to make comparison or evaluation toany of the both products.

To read the complete story, click on the Read more ... link.

The article was written by Faulkner, Kent - USA and updated by Havewala, Porus -Australia.

1. SINGLE PLATFORM DEPENDANCY

SQL Server is only operable on the Windows platform, and this is a major limitationfor it to be an enterprise solution. Oracle is available on multiple platforms such asWindows, all flavors of Unix from vendors such as IBM, Sun, Digital, HP, Sequent,etc. and VAX- VMS as well as MVS. The multi-platform nature of Oracle makes it a

true enterprise solution.2. LOCKING / CONCURRENCY

SQL Server has no multi-version consistency model which means that "writers blockreaders and readers block writers" to ensure data integrity. In contrast, with Oracle therule is "readers dont block writers and writers dont block readers". This is possiblewithout compromising data integrity because Oracle will dynamically re-create aread-consistent image for a reader of any requested data that has been changed but notyet committed.

In other words, the reader will see the data as it was before the writer began changingit (until the writer commits). SQL Server's locking scheme is much simpler (lessmature) and will result in a lot ff delays/waits in a heavy OLTP environment.Also, SQL Server will escalate row locks to page level locks when too many rows ona page are locked. This locks rows which are uninvolved in any updates for no goodreason.

3. POTENTIAL OF LONG UNCOMMITED TRANSACTIONS HALTINGDATABASE ACTIVITY

In SQL Server 2000, a long uncommitted transaction can stop other transactionswhich queue behind it in the single transaction log, and this can stop all activity on thedatabase, whereas in Oracle, if there is a long uncommitted transaction, only the

transaction itself will stop when it runs out of rollback space, because of the use ofdifferent rollback segments for transactions.

Oracle allocates transactions randomly to any of its multiple rollback segments andareas inside that rollback segment. When the transaction is committed, that space isreleased for other transactions, however Sql server allocates transactions sequentiallyto its single transaction log, the space occupied by committed transactions is not


12/26

released to new transactions until the recycling of the transaction log is complete (in acircular round-robin manner).

This means if there is an uncommitted transaction in the middle, and the transactionlog cannot grow by increasing the file size, no new transactions will be allowed. Thisis the potential of a single uncommitted transaction to halt database activity.

4. PERFORMANCE and TUNING

a. No control of sorting (memory allocation) in SQL Server. Oracle can fully controlthe sort area size and allows it to be set by the DBA.

b. No control over SQL Caching (memory allocation) in SQL Server. This iscontrollable in Oracle.

c. No control over storage/space management to prevent fragmentation in SQLServer. 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 Oracle, this is fully configurable.d. No range partioning of large tables and indexes in SQL Server, whereas in Oracle alarge table (eg. 100 GB or more) can be seamlessly partitioned at the database levelinto range partitions, for eg. an invoice table can be partitioned into monthlypartitions.

Such partitioned tables and partitioned indexes give performance and maintenancebenefits and are transparent to the application.

e. No Log miner facility in SQL Server. Oracle 8i and 9i supply a Log Miner whichenables inspection of archived redo logs. This comes free with the database. But in thecase of SQL Server, external products from other companies have to be purchased todo this important DBA task.f. A SQL Server DBA claimed that fully qualifying the name of an object in SQLServer code would lead to performance gains of 7% to 10%. There are no dictionaryperformance problems like that in Oracle. Oracle would have some gains if it fullyqualified all names - say 0.01 percent.

This actually shows the difference in the internal database technology between Oracleand Microsoft and implies that the technology of resolving object names via thedictionary is more advanced in the case of Oracle, ie. Oracle seems to better access itsinternal dictionary and resolve names, unlike SQL server.

5. MISSING OBJECT TYPES IN SQL SERVERa. No public or private synonyms b. No independent sequences c. No packages ie.collection of procedures and functions.

6. PROGRAMMING


13/26

a. Significant extensions to the ANSI SQL-92 standard in SQL Server, which meansconverting applications to a different database later will be a challenge (code re-write).

b. Sql Server has no inbuilt JAVA database engine as in Oracle. In Oracle, Javaclasses can be loaded and executed in the database itself, thus adding the database'ssecurity and scalability to Java applications.

c. In SQL Server, stored Procedures are not compiled until executed (overhead). InOracle, packages and procs/functions are compiled before execution.

In Oracle 9i it is also possible to translate Pl/Sql into C code and then compile/link thecode, which gives very good performance gains for numeric intensive operations.SQL Server has no such ability.

d. In SQL server, there is no ability to read/write from external files from a storedprocedure. Oracle has this ability.

e. SQL Server uses cryptic commands for database administration like:exec sp_addrolemember N'db_datareader', N'davidb' go

This is to add the user davidb to the role db_datareader.

On the other hand, Oracle uses standard English-like SQL commands to do the same:

grant db_datareader to davidb;

This one statement does all, in simple English, what the cryptic SQL Server commanddoes.

f. Oracle SQL and PL/SQL syntax is more powerful and can do things moreintuitively than Microsoft Transact-SQL. Try to sum up a column by each month, andshow the totals for the month, in SQL Server you do it in T-SQL by grouping onstrings, in Oracle it is possible to do this grouping by the trunc(,'month') function. Thismethod in Oracle is more intuitive, it understands the dates, the method in SQL Serverdoes not.

g. In SQL Server, you cannot issue a "create or replace" for either procedures orviews, in Oracle you can. This one facility simplifies code writing, since in Sql Serverthe procedure or view must be dropped first if present and then recreated ie. twocommands, in Oracle there is no need - a single command "create or replace" isenough.

h. In Oracle, a procedure/function/package/view is marked as invalid if a dependantobject changes. In SQL Server there is no concept of an invalid procedure, it will runbut give unexpected results. The former is more suitable for change control andpreventing unexpected errors.

i. A recompile reuses the code that is in the Oracle database, the actual command is"alter procedure compile". This is applicable to procedures/functions/packages/views.


14/26

This concept of recompiling is not there in SQL Server where you have to resubmitthe whole code if you want to recompile a procedure.

j. Triggers in Oracle do not allow transactional control ie. commit/rollback/savepointstatements. Whereas, triggers in SQL Server allow commits/rollbacks, which ispotentially dangerous and can cause problems with transactions which fire the trigger.

Triggers in SQL Server also can start transactions of their own which is not very goodand shows lack of maturity of the language.

7. STANDBY DIFFERENCES

SQL Server and Oracle have differences regarding standby databases. A standby is adatabase set up on a second server and to which logs are applied ie. all databasechanges, so that the standby can be activated and used in the case of a failover.

a. In the case of Sql server, when there is a failover, the "master" and "msdb"databases have to be restored from backup or copied over from the primary to the

standby and then the standby is activated after all logs are applied. In Oracle, there isno need for a restore to be done, the standby can be activated at any time after all logsare applied.

This difference exists because of the fact that in SQL server, new users/roles added tothe primary are not carried over to the standby (these users/roles go in themaster/msdb) and backups have to be done continuously of the master and msdb,these backups are then restored when the time comes for a failover.

In the case of Oracle, users/roles when created in the primary are automaticallycarried over to the standby. So when the failover time arrives, all that is needed is toactivate the standby.

b. In the case of Sql Server, if the standby is opened as read only, to switch it back tostandby again, a restore from backup has to be done. In the case of Oracle, from 8iversion onwards, if a standby database is opened as read only, it can be reopened as astandby without restoring from backup.

c. The time delay to apply logs between the primary and the standby can be varied,but it can never be 0 minutes in the case of SQL Server.

In the case of Oracle, in 9i it is possible to have logs applied simultaneously to theprimary as well as standby, using Net8 protocol. This means zero data loss in the caseof a failover whereas SQL Server's log shipping cannot avoid data loss d during the

time gap.d. SQL Server's log shipping mechanism also happens at the OS level, whereasOracle's mechanism can take place directly at the Net8 level where logs areautomatically applied to standbys without any scripts or OS batch files, thismechanism in Oracle is called managed standby.

e.One deficiency of Oracle in the standby was that datafiles, if created on the primary,had to be manually created on the standby whereas SQL Server does this


15/26

automatically. However, in 9i, this deficiency is fixed and data files are createdautomatically at the standby.

f. Another deficiency of Oracle in the standby is that direct loads, if using theunrecoverable facility to bypass redo logging, require the data files of the primarydatabase to be manually copied across to the standby. This is not fixed in 9i. SQLServer's version of log shipping and direct loads do not require this copying across.

8. CLUSTER TECHNOLOGY

In clustering technology, in the case of SQL Server, two nodes cannot work on thesame database, they "share nothing". At the best, to utilize the power of both nodes,the application must be manually spit up and redistributed between the hosts, workingon different sets of data, and it is not possible to seamlessly scale upwards by addinganother node to the cluster in the case of SQL Server.

Most cluster configurations in Sql Server use the power of only one node, leaving theother node to take over only if there is a problem with the first node.

In the case of Oracle Parallel server, it is possible to have two or more instances of thedatabase on different nodes acting on the SAME data in active-active configurations.Lock management is handled by the Oracle Parallel server. With the new version ofParallel Server in Oracle 9i, renamed as the Oracle real application cluster (9i RAC),there is diskless contention handling of read-read, read- write, write-read, and write-write contention between the instances.

This diskless contention handling is called Cache Fusion and it means for the firsttime, any application can be placed in a cluster without any changes, and it scalesupwards by just adding another machine to the cluster.

Microsoft has nothing like this clustering technology of Oracle, which can best bedescribed as "light years ahead".

9. REPLICATION DIFFERENCES

In Microsoft SQL Server's version of simple replication ie, publisher-subscriber usingtransactional replication, even if only one table is being replicated, the entiretransaction log is checked by the log reader agent and transactional changes applied tothe subscribers.

In Oracle's simple replication, changes to a single table are stored in a snapshot logand copied across, there is no need to check all the archive logs.

10. SECURITYAs of 2002, Oracle has 14 independent security evaluations; Microsoft SQL Serverhas only one.

11. INFORMATION POOL

SQL Server and Internet articles of the magazine are only available with paidsubscription. Whereas, Oracle has given its magazine free for many years, all articles


16/26

are free on the internet, and the Oracle Technical network (OTN) is also free on theinternet.

12. USABILITY

Some people say Microsoft SQL Server tools, like Enterprise manager, are easy to

use. Oracle Enterprise Manager is a huge tool and seems daunting to inexperiencedpeople. This is true to an extent, however ease of use cannot be compared with themany features in Oracle, and its industrial-level strength, and its many technicaladvantages.

13. TCP Benchmarks

March 2002 Benchmarks from TPC.org show that Oracle 9i is seen in the majority oftop benchmarks in "non-clustered" TPC-C for performance (OLTP), whereas SQLServer is seen in the majority of entries for "clustered" TPC-C for performance(OLTP).

This gives the strange impression that SQL server is faster in a cluster than in a non-cluster, which is misleading. The fact is that this result is due to the use of "federateddatabases" in clusters by Microsoft in which pieces of the application are broken upand placed on separate active-active servers, each working on separate pieces of theapplication.

While excellent for theoretical benchmarks, this is not a practical approach in the reallife IT world because it requires massive changes to any application, and also ongoingchanges to the application when new servers are added to the cluster (each server hasa view that sees the data in the other servers, adding a new server would meanrewriting the views for all tables on all servers) and would be rejected by any practical

headed manager.Using this impractical approach of federated databases in clusters, the impression isthat Sql-server leads in clustered performance, but the practical reality is otherwise.This is seen in the way SQL Server is not to be seen in the non-clustered benchmarks.

Also, Oracle leads the way for Tpc benchmarks for Decision Support Systems with1,000 Gb and 3,000 Gb sizes (TPC-H by performance per scale), whereas SQL Serveris only seen to a small extent in the 300GB range.

14. XML Support

To provide a more native support for XML, the first release of Oracle9i Database

introduced the XMLType datatype and associated XML specific behavior. In addition,built in XML generation and aggregation operators greatly increase the throughput ofXML processing.

With the second release of Oracle9i, Oracle significantly adds to XML support in thedatabase server. This fully absorbs the W3C XML data model into the Oracledatabase, and provides new standard access methods for navigating and queryingXML - creating a native integrated XML database within the Oracle RDBMS.


17/26

The key XDB technologies can be grouped into two major classes - XMLType thatprovides a native XML storage and retrieval capability strongly integrated with SQL,and an XML Repository that provides foldering, access control, versioning etc. forXML resources. The integration of a native XML capability within the databasebrings a number of benefits.

In summation, Oracle9i Release 2's XDB functionality is a high- performance XMLstorage and retrieval technology available with the Oracle9i Release 2 database. Itfully absorbs the W3C XML data model into the Oracle Database, and provides newstandard access methods for navigating and querying XML. With XDB, you get allthe advantages of relational database technology and XML technology at the sametime.

In contrast to this, Microsoft SQL Server 2000 only has limited ways to read and writexml from its tables.

SUMMARY

SQL Server is clearly positioned between MS-ACCESS and ORACLE in terms offunctionality, performance, and scalability. It makes a work group level solution(small number of users with small amount of data), perhaps at the departmental level.

Oracle is much more advanced and has more to offer for larger applications with bothOLTP and Data Warehouse applications. Its new clustering features are ideal forApplication Service Providers (ASPs) on the Internet who can now start with a clusterof 2 small servers and grow by just adding a server when they need to. Besides,Oracle's multi-platform capability makes it the most convincing argument for anenterprise.

Related links More about Oracle Tips & Ideas News by Administrator--------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------

Most read story in Oracle Tips & Ideas: 127 Oracle DBA job interview questions

Oracle versus Microsoft SQL Server 2000 comparission | Login/Create an account | 2Comments Threshold -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 No comments Nested Flat Thread Oldest firstNewest first Highest scores first Comments are owned by the poster. We aren'tresponsible for their content.

Re: Oracle versus Microsoft SQL Server 2000 comparission (Score: 0) byAnonymous on Feb 18, 2003 - 10:15 AM I am a Project Manager who has worked on

both SQLserver and Oracle projects in internet and standard LAN environments. Myopinion is based on user perceptions of the databases and may have no justificationtechnically, but they are what people are saying.

Most users don't care what the database is. Often they will be a MS or Oracle shopand that's that, you wont change them. So usually there is no choice or evencomparison of technologies, it's just "we have an Oracle licence, use it" and that's it.There is more to speed than the database.


18/26

The raw grunt of the database is rarely a problem. You are far more likely to findspeed issues that come from poor database design, crappy data models, slownetworks, poor application architecture or just plain bad software design than from theactual speed of the database. When you get to the really high end, sure it matters, butthe time and effort spent changing from RDBMS to the other to get extra speed (if

there is any, and marginal at best) could be better spent on a gruntier box, you'll needone next year anyway.

Once an MS shop, always an MS shop. MS has the "integration" of its products downpat. If you implement an MS solution from end-to-end, likely you will never get out.Their products are so dependent upon each other that to replace one component is justtoo hard. You can build similar implementations in Oracle by embedding logic in thedatabase, but you don't have to.

Oracle is far more OPEN to different clients and platforms. If you want an SQLserversystem to run at optimal performance, it's MS end- to-end.

Robert Green Software Developer, Consulting/Systems IntegratorRe: Oracle versus Microsoft SQL Server 2000 comparission (Score: 0) byAnonymous on Feb 19, 2003 - 10:23 AM SQL Server is a joke

With all the hype, MSFT still can't keep locks from escalating and DB reads clean.Until MSFT, SYBS, and IBM do so they will not be taken seriously in the high OLTPworld demanded by the web.

Check the stats, 10 of the top 10 web sites in the world use Oracle. As far as the TPCbenchmarks are concerned, IBM and MSFT are using smoke and mirrors. It tookTWELVE separate databases to be only twice as fast as ONE Oracle database.

Oracle has been able to use federations of databases (used by MSFT and IBM) forbenchmarks for five years. Oracle could beat IBM numbers 10 times over using afederation, but won't because any real DBA would never consider using this uselessconfiguration in a real situation. Shared disk is the cluster configuration of everymajor system on the web, MSFT, IBM and everybody else can't yet do it so they useShared nothing, which is good for just that, NOTHING. If you buy into the hype, besure to keep your receipt! by vikram lashkari

-- Vikram Lashkari ([email protected]), April 20, 2004.

Thank you all for these great answers, I have been looking for a succinct precis likethis for a while, you have saved me much wading through sales material.

-- Martin Lang ([email protected]), April 22, 2004.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


19/26

I have a very specific comparison between both the DB. If u need to update multiplecolumn with the condition in Oracle it is possible but same thing is not possible atSQL server.

Ex: update emp set (empname,sal)=( select empname,sal from emp whereempcode=10000)

-- Arun Kumar ([email protected]), April 26, 2004.

in both you have procedural langage but:

a) oracle , you can catch exception where you want, even a the end of procedure andthen trapping all cases.

b) sql2000, yu need to write your own code AFTER EACH statement, heavy,heavy,heavy.

-- bruno delaunay ([email protected]), May 31, 2004.

Oracle is best perfomance rather than SQL Server...

-- Alim ([email protected]), June 04, 2004.

this is some good stuff. i learnt a lot ,thanx.

-- xyzstarr ([email protected]), July 02, 2004.

SQL Server 2000 only works on Windows-based platforms, including Windows 9x,Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows CE. In comparison with SQL Server2000, Oracle 9i Database supports all known platforms, including Windows-basedplatforms, AIX-Based Systems, Compaq Tru64 UNIX, HP 9000 Series HP-UX,Linux Intel, Sun Solaris and so on.

It is very difficult to make the performance comparison between SQL Server 2000and Oracle 9i Database. The performance of your databases depends rather from theexperience of the database developers and database administrator than from thedatabase's provider. You can use both of these RDBMS to build stable and efficientsystem. However, it is possible to define the typical transactions, which used in

inventory control systems, airline reservation systems and banking systems. Afterdefining these typical transactions, it is possible to run them under the differentdatabase management systems working on the different hardware and softwareplatforms. Both SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i Database support the ANSI SQL-92entry level and do not support the ANSI SQL-92 intermediate level. In the Featurescomparison section of this article I want to make the brief comparison of the Transact-SQL with PL/SQL and show some SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i Database limits.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


20/26

SQL Server 2000 vs Oracle 9i Alexander Chigrik [email protected]

--------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------

Introduction Platform comparison Hardware requirements Software requirementsPerformance comparison TPC tests Price comparison Features comparison T-SQL vs

PL/SQL SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i limits Conclusion Literature--------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------

Introduction Often people in newsgroups ask about some comparison of Oracle andMicrosoft SQL Server. In this article, I compare SQL Server 2000 with Oracle 9iDatabase regarding price, performance, platforms supported, SQL dialects andproducts limits.

Platform comparison SQL Server 2000 only works on Windows-based platforms,including Windows 9x, Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows CE. Incomparison with SQL Server 2000, Oracle 9i Database supports all known platforms,

including Windows-based platforms, AIX-Based Systems, Compaq Tru64 UNIX, HP9000 Series HP-UX, Linux Intel, Sun Solaris and so on.

Hardware requirements To install SQL Server 2000, you should have the Intel orcompatible platforms and the following hardware:

Hardware Requirements Processor Pentium 166 MHz or higher Memory 32 MBRAM (minimum for Desktop Engine), 64 MB RAM (minimum for all other editions),128 MB RAM or more recommended Hard disk space 270 MB (full installation), 250MB (typical), 95 MB (minimum), Desktop Engine: 44 MB Analysis Services: 50 MBminimum and 130 MB typical English Query: 80 MB

Oracle 9i supports Intel or compatible platforms, AIX-Based Systems, Compaq Tru64UNIX, HP 9000 Series HP-UX, Linux Intel, Sun Solaris and so on.To install Oracle 9i under the Intel or compatible platforms, you should have thefollowing hardware:

Hardware Requirements Processor Pentium 166 MHz or higher Memory RAM: 128MB (256 MB recommended) Virtual Memory: Initial Size 200 MB, Maximum Size400 MB Hard disk space 140 MB on the System Drive plus 4.5 GB for the OracleHome Drive (FAT) or 2.8 GB for the Oracle Home Drive (NTFS)

To install Oracle 9i Database under the UNIX Systems, such as AIX- Based Systems,Compaq Tru64 UNIX, HP 9000 Series HP-UX, and Sun Solaris, you should have the

following hardware:Hardware Requirements Memory A minimum of 512 MB RAM Swap Space Aminimum of 2 x RAM or 400 MB, whichever is greater Hard disk space 4.5 GB

Software requirements SQL Server 2000 comes in six editions: Enterprise, Standard,Personal, Developer, Desktop Engine, and SQL Server CE (a compatible version forWindows CE) and requires the following software:


21/26

Operating System Enterprise Edition Standard Edition Personal Edition DeveloperEdition Desktop Engine SQL Server CE Windows CE No No No No No YesWindows 9x No No Yes No Yes No Windows NT 4.0 Workstation with Service Pack5 No No Yes Yes Yes No Windows NT 4.0 Server with Service Pack 5 Yes Yes YesYes Yes No Windows NT 4.0 Server Enterprise Edition with Service Pack 5 Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes No Windows 2000 Professional No No Yes Yes Yes No Windows 2000Server Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Windows 2000 Advanced Server Yes Yes Yes YesYes No Windows 2000 DataCenter Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Windows XPProfessional No No Yes Yes Yes No

Oracle 9i Database comes in three editions: Enterprise, Standard and Personal andrequires the following software:

Platform Operating System Version Required Patches Windows-based Windows NT4.0 Service Pack 5 Windows-based Windows 2000 Service Pack 1 Windows-basedWindows XP Not Necessary AIX-Based AIX 4.3.3 Maintenance Level 09 and

IY24568, IY25282, IY27614, IY30151 AIX-Based AIX 5.1 AIX 5L release 5.1ML01+ (IY22854), IY26778, IY28766, IY28949, IY29965, IY30150 Compaq Tru64UNIX Tru64 5.1 5.1 patchkit 4 Compaq Tru64 UNIX Tru64 5.1A 5.1A patchkit 1HP-UX HP-UX version 11.0 (64-bit) Sept. 2001 Quality Pack, PHCO_23792,PHCO_24148, PHKL_24268, PHKL_24729, PHKL_ 25475, PHKL_25525,PHNE_24715, PHSS_23670, PHSS_24301, PHSS_24303, PHSS_24627,PHSS_22868 Linux SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 7 (or SLES-7) with kernel 2.4.7,and glibc 2.2.2 Not Necessary Sun Solaris Solaris 32-Bit 2.6 (5.6), 7 (5.7) or 8 (5.8)Not Necessary Sun Solaris Solaris 64-Bit 8 (5.8) Update 5

Performance comparison It is very difficult to make the performance comparison

between SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i Database. The performance of yourdatabases depends rather from the experience of the database developers and databaseadministrator than from the database's provider. You can use both of these RDBMS tobuild stable and efficient system. However, it is possible to define the typicaltransactions, which used in inventory control systems, airline reservation systems andbanking systems. After defining these typical transactions, it is possible to run themunder the different database management systems working on the different hardwareand software platforms.

TPC tests The Transaction Processing Performance Council (TPC.Org) is independentorganization that specifies the typical transactions (transactions used in inventory

control systems, airline reservation systems and banking systems) and some generalrules these transactions should satisfy.

The TPC produces benchmarks that measure transaction processing and databaseperformance in terms of how many transactions a given system and database canperform per unit of time, e.g., transactions per second or transactions per minute.


22/26

The TPC organization made the specification for many tests. There are TPC-C, TPC-H, TPC-R, TPC-W and some old tests, such as TPC-A, TPC-B and TPC-D. The mostpopular test is the TPC-C test (OLTP test).

At the moment the article was wrote, SQL Server 2000 held the top TPC-C byperformance results with Distributed Partitioned Views- based cluster systems. SeeTop Ten TPC-C by Performance Version 5 Results

At the moment the article was wrote, SQL Server 2000 held the top TPC-C byprice/performance results. See Top Ten TPC-C by Price/Performance Version 5Results

Note. Because most organizations really do not run very large databases, so the keypoints on which SQL Server 2000 won the TPC-C benchmarks do not really matter tothe vast majority of companies.

Price comparison One of the main Microsoft SQL Server 2000 advantage incomparison with Oracle 9i Database is that SQL Server is cheaper. Other SQL Server

advantage is that Microsoft includes the Online analytical processing (OLAP) andData Mining as standard features in SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition. So, you cansave up to four times with SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition if you use OLAP andData Mining.

The price comparisons below were based on the Oracle and SQL Server 2000 PriceComparison article from Microsoft.

Compare pricing for SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition and Oracle9i StandardEdition:

Number of CPUs Oracle9i Standard Edition SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition 1

$15,000 $4,999 2 $30,000 $9,998 4 $60,000 $19,996 8 $120,000 $39,992 16$240,000 $79,984 32 $480,000 $159,968

Compare pricing for SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition (which include OLAP andData Mining) and Oracle9i Enterprise Edition with OLAP and/or Data Mining:

Number of CPUs Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Oracle9i Enterprise Edition with OLAPor Data Mining Oracle9i Enterprise Edition With OLAP and Data Mining SQL Server2000 Enterprise Edition 1 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $19,999 2 $80,000 $120,000$160,000 $39,998 4 $160,000 $240,000 $320,000 $79,996 8 $320,000 $480,000$640,000 $159,992 16 $640,000 $960,000 $1,280,000 $319,984 32 $1,280,000$1,920,000 $2,560,000 $639,968

Note. This is not a full price comparison between SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9iDatabase. It is only a brief comparison. You can have any discounts and the prices canbe increased or decreased in the future. See Microsoft and Oracle to get moreinformation about the price of their products.

Features comparison Both SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i Database support the ANSISQL-92 entry level and do not support the ANSI SQL-92 intermediate level. In the


23/26

Features comparison section of this article I want to make the brief comparison of theTransact-SQL with PL/SQL and show some SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i Databaselimits.

T-SQL vs PL/SQL The dialect of SQL supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000 iscalled Transact-SQL (T-SQL). The dialect of SQL supported by Oracle 9i Database iscalled PL/SQL. PL/SQL is more powerful language than T- SQL

-- Narayana Reddy P ([email protected]), July 03, 2004.

Difference between Oracle and SQL 2000

Introduction In this article, I compare SQL Server 2000 with Oracle 9i Databaseregarding price, performance, platforms supported, SQL dialects and products limits.

Platform comparison SQL Server 2000 only works on Windows-based platforms,including Windows 9x, Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows CE. In

comparison with SQL Server 2000, Oracle 9i Database supports all known platforms,including Windows-based platforms, AIX-Based Systems, Compaq Tru64 UNIX, HP9000 Series HP-UX, Linux Intel, Sun Solaris and so on.

Hardware requirements To install SQL Server 2000, you should have the Intel orcompatible platforms and the following hardware: Hardware Requirements ProcessorPentium 166 MHz or higher Memory 32 MB RAM (minimum for DesktopEngine),64 MB RAM (minimum for all other editions),128 MB RAM or morerecommended Hard disk space 270 MB (full installation),250 MB (typical),95 MB(minimum),Desktop Engine: 44 MBAnalysis Services: 50 MB minimum and 130 MBtypicalEnglish Query: 80 MB

Oracle 9i supports Intel or compatible platforms, AIX-Based Systems, Compaq Tru64UNIX, HP 9000 Series HP-UX, Linux Intel, Sun Solaris and so on.

To install Oracle 9i under the Intel or compatible platforms, you should have thefollowing hardware: Hardware Requirements Processor Pentium 166 MHz or higherMemory RAM: 128 MB (256 MB recommended)Virtual Memory: Initial Size 200MB, Maximum Size 400 MB Hard disk space 140 MB on the System Driveplus 4.5GB for the Oracle Home Drive (FAT)or 2.8 GB for the Oracle Home Drive (NTFS)

To install Oracle 9i Database under the UNIX Systems, such as AIX- Based Systems,Compaq Tru64 UNIX, HP 9000 Series HP-UX, and Sun Solaris, you should have the

following hardware: Hardware Requirements Memory A minimum of 512 MB RAMSwap Space A minimum of 2 x RAM or 400 MB, whichever is greater Hard diskspace 4.5 GB

Software requirements SQL Server 2000 comes in six editions: Enterprise, Standard,Personal, Developer, Desktop Engine, and SQL Server CE (a compatible version forWindows CE) and requires the following software:
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


24/26

Operating Enterprise Standard Personal Developer Desktop SQL Server SystemEdition Edition Edition Edition Engine CE Windows CE No No No No No Yes

Windows 9x No No Yes No Yes No

Windows NT 4.0 Workstation with Service Pack 5 No No Yes Yes Yes No

Windows NT 4.0 Server with Service Pack 5 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes NoWindows NT 4.0 Server Enterprise Edition with Service Pack 5 Yes Yes Yes Yes YesNo

Windows 2000 Professional No No Yes Yes Yes No Windows 2000 Server Yes YesYes Yes Yes No Windows 2000 Advanced Server Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes NoWindows 2000 DataCenter Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Windows XP Professional NoNo Yes Yes Yes No

Performance comparison It is very difficult to make the performance comparisonbetween SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i Database. The performance of your

databases depends rather from the experience of the database developers and databaseadministrator than from the database's provider. You can use both of these RDBMS tobuild stable and efficient system. However, it is possible to define the typicaltransactions, which used in inventory control systems, airline reservation systems andbanking systems. After defining these typical transactions, it is possible to run themunder the different database management systems working on the different hardwareand software platforms.

TPC tests The Transaction Processing Performance Council (TPC.Org) is independentorganization that specifies the typical transactions (transactions used in inventorycontrol systems, airline reservation systems and banking systems) and some general

rules these transactions should satisfy.The TPC produces benchmarks that measure transaction processing and databaseperformance in terms of how many transactions a given system and database canperform per unit of time, e.g., transactions per second or transactions per minute.

The TPC organization made the specification for many tests. There are TPC-C, TPC-H, TPC-R, TPC-W and some old tests, such as TPC-A, TPC-B and TPC-D. The mostpopular test is the TPC-C test (OLTP test).

At the moment the article was wrote, SQL Server 2000 held the top TPC- C byperformance results with Distributed Partitioned Views-based cluster systems. See

Top Ten TPC-C by Performance Version 5 ResultsAt the moment the article was wrote, SQL Server 2000 held the top TPC- C byprice/performance results. See Top Ten TPC-C by Price/Performance Version 5Results

Note. Because most organizations really do not run very large databases, so the keypoints on which SQL Server 2000 won the TPC-C benchmarks do not really matter tothe vast majority of companies. Price comparison One of the main Microsoft SQL


25/26

Server 2000 advantage in comparison with Oracle 9i Database is that SQL Server ischeaper. Other SQL Server advantage is that Microsoft includes the Online analyticalprocessing (OLAP) and Data Mining as standard features in SQL Server 2000Enterprise Edition. So, you can save up to four times with SQL Server 2000Enterprise Edition if you use OLAP and Data Mining.

The price comparisons below were based on the Oracle and SQL Server 2000 PriceComparison article from Microsoft. Compare pricing for SQL Server 2000 StandardEdition and Oracle9i Standard Edition: Number of CPUs Oracle9i Standard EditionSQL Server 2000 Standard Edition 1 $15,000 $4,999 2 $30,000 $9,998 4 $60,000$19,996 8 $120,000 $39,992 16 $240,000 $79,984 32 $480,000 $159,968

Features comparison Both SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i Database support the ANSISQL-92 entry level and do not support the ANSI SQL-92 intermediate level. In theFeatures comparison section of this article I want to make the brief comparison of theTransact-SQL with PL/SQL and show some SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i Database

limits.Conclusion It is not true that SQL Server 2000 is better than Oracle 9i or vice versa.Both products can be used to build stable and efficient system and the stability andeffectiveness of your applications and databases depend rather from the experience ofthe database developers and database administrator than from the database's provider.But SQL Server 2000 has some advantages in comparison with Oracle 9i and viceversa.

The SQL Server 2000 advantages: SQL Server 2000 is cheaper to buy than Oracle 9iDatabase. SQL Server 2000 holds the top TPC-C performance andprice/performance results. SQL Server 2000 is generally accepted as easier to install,

use and manage. The Oracle 9i Database advantages: Oracle 9i Database supports allknown platforms, not only the Windows-based platforms. PL/SQL is more powerfullanguage than T-SQL. More fine-tuning to the configuration can be done via start-up parameters.

-- Veena ([email protected]), August 11, 2004.

tell me difference between oracle 8i and sql server 2000

-- ranjan ([email protected]), August 12, 2004.

Thanx for the discussion, if u find the better one mail to me [email protected]

-- shankar ([email protected]), September 17, 2004.


26/26

thanks for ur valuable information and pl continue the same

-- viswanadh kiran ([email protected]), October 18, 2004.

All are bullsit man. No oracle is good no SQL server is good. Only DB2 is good man.

SQL 2005 is best.But still oracle is better than bestSmitP

-- Smriti Panta ([email protected]), February 11, 2005.

Moderation questions? readthe FAQ
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.greenspun.com/bboard/user_faq.htmlmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.greenspun.com/bboard/user_faq.html

at lease 10 difference between oracle 8i and sql server 2000

Documents