Comparing SQL Server to Oracle

I have a client that is wanting to know the advantages of SQL Server over
Oracle - to be used by in-house developers as the database for custom
applications.
Can anyone provide a few high-level points or links to articles that compare
the products?
Thanks!This has been discussed at length here. Please check archive for the
discussions:
http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?q=oracle+vs+sqlserver
-oj
"Smithers" <a@.b.com> wrote in message
news:e03W%234kCFHA.3368@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I have a client that is wanting to know the advantages of SQL Server over
>Oracle - to be used by in-house developers as the database for custom
>applications.
> Can anyone provide a few high-level points or links to articles that
> compare the products?
> Thanks!
>|||please have a look at the top20 oracle features:
http://www.oracle.com/technology/pu...gdba/index.html
do we have such things in SQL Server?|||It's total cost of ownership is significantly less than Oracle.
The skill level required for a "moderately" effective DBA
to manage the database is less because the tools are far
more intuitive and they are familiar to developers utilizing
Microsoft development tools.
I say that having 5 years of Oracle experience and 5
years of SQL Server experience. Nothing wrong at
all with Oracle. In fact, we use both here at work.
However, for the scenario you describe, I believe
SQL Server is a much better fit.
2005 Microsoft MVP C#
Robbe Morris
http://www.masterado.net
http://www.mastervb.net
"Smithers" <a@.b.com> wrote in message
news:e03W%234kCFHA.3368@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>I have a client that is wanting to know the advantages of SQL Server over
>Oracle - to be used by in-house developers as the database for custom
>applications.
> Can anyone provide a few high-level points or links to articles that
> compare the products?
> Thanks!
>|||Not only is it lower now, the TCO gap is going to be seriously affected with
the emergence of multi-core chips. MS SQL counts these as single chips
(therefore no extra cost) but Oracle counts them as multi-CPUs (doubling the
per-CPU license costs). Given Oracle's already huge per-CPU licensing cost,
this is really going to blow the TCO gap even wider.
Regards,
Greg Linwood
SQL Server MVP
"Robbe Morris" <info@.turnkeytools.com> wrote in message
news:eb6J6emCFHA.464@.TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> It's total cost of ownership is significantly less than Oracle.
> The skill level required for a "moderately" effective DBA
> to manage the database is less because the tools are far
> more intuitive and they are familiar to developers utilizing
> Microsoft development tools.
> I say that having 5 years of Oracle experience and 5
> years of SQL Server experience. Nothing wrong at
> all with Oracle. In fact, we use both here at work.
> However, for the scenario you describe, I believe
> SQL Server is a much better fit.
> --
> 2005 Microsoft MVP C#
> Robbe Morris
> http://www.masterado.net
> http://www.mastervb.net
>
>
> "Smithers" <a@.b.com> wrote in message
> news:e03W%234kCFHA.3368@.TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>|||"Smithers" <a@.b.com> writes:

> I have a client that is wanting to know the advantages of SQL Server over
> Oracle - to be used by in-house developers as the database for custom
> applications.
> Can anyone provide a few high-level points or links to articles that compa
re
> the products?
For most in-house apps, either would be fine, and therefore, SQLServer
is probably the better choice because of ease of administration and
out-of-the-box development. IMO, the fundamental difference between
the two is that, in SQLServer, writers block readers and readers block
writers while, in Oracle, writers don't block readers and readers
don't block writers.
In SQLServer, you have code which sort of looks like the following:
Q: Is the row locked?
YES:
- Should I wait for some specific time and retry?
- Go back to the user and let them know?
- Something else?
- Some combination of the above?
NO:
- Okay, let me grab this row so I don't have to go through the
YES steps.
In Oracle, you never have to answer the "is it locked" question unless
two processes are both trying to write the same row.
Other than that, I find them quite similar, but that behaviour is one
that you should definitely understand when choosing between the two.
Galen Boyer

Community Question: Fastest update path for experienced SQL Server 2000 developers.

Hi,
I have several years of experience working on SQL server versions 7-2000.
Now I would like to update my knowledge to SQL Server 2005. The problem is
that most of books I saw try to explain old SQL 2000 features mixed with new
SQL 2005 features.
Could you refer me to books or resources that update my SQL Server knowledge
without bothering with explaining old SQL 2000 related features?
Any help would be appreciated,
MaxHello Maxwell2006,
If you like books, go with http://www.aw-bc.com/catalog/academ...1382188,00.html
(when it comes out)
If you like class room training, come spend a w with me... ;)
Thank you,
Kent Tegels
DevelopMentor
http://staff.develop.com/ktegels/|||Hi Kent,
Thank you for reply.
I am looking for online type of resources and ready to buy books. Do you
know any?
Regards,
Max
"Kent Tegels" <ktegels@.develop.com> wrote in message
news:b87ad74171d48c8144990ba2865@.news.microsoft.com...
> Hello Maxwell2006,
> If you like books, go with
> http://www.aw-bc.com/catalog/academ...1382188,00.html
> (when it comes out)
> If you like class room training, come spend a w with me... ;)
> Thank you,
> Kent Tegels
> DevelopMentor
> http://staff.develop.com/ktegels/
>|||On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 23:57:03 -0500, Maxwell2006 wrote:
(snip)
>Could you refer me to books or resources that update my SQL Server knowledg
e
>without bothering with explaining old SQL 2000 related features?
Hi Max,
I'm in the exact same situation. I've recently (last w) picked up a
copy of "Pro SQL Server 2005" (by Thomas Rizzo et. al.) It does exactly
what you and I want: skip past everything that was already present in
SQL Server 2005 and plunge right into the new features.
First impressions are good, though I should hasten to add that I'm only
halfway chapter 2 yet.
Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP|||Thank you very much Hugo. I was thinking about that book last night and I
wasn't sure I should go ahead or not. Now I am going to order it with
confident.
Thanks again,
Max
"Hugo Kornelis" <hugo@.perFact.REMOVETHIS.info.INVALID> wrote in message
news:fk2c1252kk2b3o28qf2lu5me1dfuemsrs3@.
4ax.com...
> On Sun, 12 Mar 2006 23:57:03 -0500, Maxwell2006 wrote:
> (snip)
> Hi Max,
> I'm in the exact same situation. I've recently (last w) picked up a
> copy of "Pro SQL Server 2005" (by Thomas Rizzo et. al.) It does exactly
> what you and I want: skip past everything that was already present in
> SQL Server 2005 and plunge right into the new features.
> First impressions are good, though I should hasten to add that I'm only
> halfway chapter 2 yet.
> --
> Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP

Committing a Stored Procedure

hi there,

I am connecting to a sql server express 2005 database which is located on another developers machine in the company. he has given me the username and password and i can read and write to this db using vs2005 no problems.

i can also added new tables and everything through the management studio, but when i add stored procedures, it does not seem to commit to the database, when i click save it asks for a local destination but i want it to save onto the sql server.

i can add stored procedures through vs 2005 no problems! this does not make sense?

Hi,

yes it sure does. You don′t have to save the procs you have to execute the DDL rather than saving the code. That should work.

HTH, Jens Suessmeyer.

http://www.sqlserver2005.de

|||Can you please explain how to execute the DDL step by step, because I have pressed EXECUTE and it just runs the query and displays the results|||OK, due to he fact that I don′t have your code right here and you didn′t pasted it in your previous post I assume that you don′t have any DDL code right now.

DDL code (especially for procs) begin with

CREATE PROCEDURE (...)

If you don′t have such DDL code, you just have a query. What code are you executing ?|||

Hi Jens,

I sorted it out...I clicked Stored Procedures>New stored procedure and from the Query Menu>Specify values for template> and then fill that form out and then it commits it to the database NO PROBLEMS!