Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Can you mail me at lease 10 difference between oracle 8i and sql server 2000?
pl send the difference between oracle 8i and sql server 2000 more over advantage and
disadvantage of oracle & sql Server
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 on
WINDOWS-NT only. There are certain futures which one will miss, if he uses SQL
SERVER without Windiws-NT server.
Thanks.
plz i want to difference between sql and oracle kindly help me.
SQL Server is usually easier to setup/configure, and get going - especially in terms of
integrating into other Microsoft applications.
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 will
refute that 5. Replication is much easier in SQL (I have been at clients where even the
Oracle consultant couldn't get it working w/oracle) 6. Failover support in SQL is
much, much easier 7. JDBC support is much better in Oracle, although Microsoft is
working on it 8. ODBC support in both 9. SQL is ANSI-SQL '92 compliant, making it
easier to convert to another ANSI compliant database, theoretically anyway (truth is
every database has proprietary extensions). Oracle is generally more proprietary and
their main goal is to keep their customers locked-in. 10. SQL natively supports
ODBC, OLEDB, XML, XML Query, XML updates. Oracle natively supports
proprietary connections, JDBC. Not sure about XML support though. 11. SQL Server
is much easier to administrate, with GUI and command- line tools. Most of Oracle is
command-line (Back in SQL 6.5 days I had a customer who was so proud that after a
day'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 Oracle
it is a separate purchase.
Hope this helps some.
Is the query language the same for sql server 2000 and oracle? What is the difference
between pl/sql and sql?
Oracle will be used especially in large database. But if we use sql server in such a
environment, the data processing will become very slower. Oracle database very
closely supports Java rather than Sql server.
Oracle 7 was RDBMS, i.e it was a relation database and the one's after that i.e. 8
onwards Oracle introduced the concept of OODBMS. Which stands for Object
Oriented Database Management Systems. With every major release Oracle has
initiated a lot of changes for the better. Like (1) Getting PL/SQL closer to ANSI SQL
standards (2) Automatic Management of Undo from 9i onwards (3) Introduction of
special Grouping operators for queries (4) ISQL env for easier query processing (5)
RAC (I dunno much about it) (6) AS(Application Server, integrated into the
database)
-- humdum (humdum@yahoo.com), April 23, 2003.
SQL server GUI is easy to work. SQL serever is easy to maintain. Orcal data
procssing is very good compared to SQL server
Here is a brief comparison between Oracle 9i and SQL Server 2000. Platform
dependancy 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 as
Windows, 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. Locking and concurrency SQL Server has no multi-version
consistency model, which means that "writers block readers and readers block
writers" to ensure data integrity. In contrast, with Oracle, the rule is "readers don't
block writers and writers don't block readers." This is possible without compromising
data integrity because Oracle will dynamically re-create a read-consistent image for a
reader of any requested data that has been changed but not yet committed. In other
words, 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) and
will result in a lot of delays/waits in a heavy OLTP environment. Also, SQL Server
will 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. Performance
and tuning a. 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. 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 contiguous
space 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 range
partitions. For example, an invoice table can be partitioned into monthly partitions.
Such partitioned tables and partitioned indexes give performance and maintenance
benefits and are transparent to the application. d. There is no partitioning in SQL
Server. e. There are no bitmap indexes in SQL Server. f. There are no reverse key
indexes 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 object
types missing in SQL Server that exist in Oracle. a. You cannot declare public or
private synonyms. b. There is no such thing as independent sequence objects. c. There
are no packages; i.e., collections of procedures and functions. d. No "before" event
triggers (only "after" event triggers) and no row triggers (only statement). e. No object
types like in PL/SQL. PL/SQL versus T-SQL a. In T-SQL there are significant
extensions 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, LEFT
OUTER, RIGHT OUTER JOIN syntax differs from the classic JOIN. b. No Java
database engine as in Oracle. c. Stored procedures in SQL Server are not compiled
until executed (which means overhead, late binding and finding errors at execution
time 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 limited
number of extended and system stored procedures in the master database. f. PL/SQL
is 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 MINUS
operator, that makes finding schema differences more difficult in SQL Server. h. In
SQL Server there is no "dead connection detection". Clients who lose their connection
may still hold locks until a DBA is notified to kill their server side processes. i. In
SQL Server there is no such thing as SQL*NET aliases/service names! This means
applications have to hard code the actual server name into their apps, making it
difficult to move databases later to load balance across servers. Clustering technology
In clustering technology, Oracle is light years ahead, since SQL Server has nothing
like 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 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 first
time, any application can be placed in a cluster without any changes, and it scales
upwards 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 the
transaction log files. In Enterprise Edition there is a log shipping process that is not so
reliable. b. If the logs fill up the disk, the database will crash hard. c. Sometimes this
requires the server itself to be rebooted. Summary SQL Server is clearly positioned
between Microsoft Access and Oracle in terms of functionality, performance and
scalability. It is a good workgroup-level solution, a very quick time to market
solution, and is very simple to use and administer. Oracle is much more advanced and
has more to offer for larger applications with both OLTP and data warehouse
applications. 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 and
grow by just adding a server when they need to.
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 have
survived the market share ...and sql server is still there ..;-)
geniemani
hi send me diffrances
Hi Forget it,
That was a nice analysis by subramani!. You are forgetting that he was only
responding to the question about differences between SQL server and Oracle but not
trying (to sell oracle and to demean SQL server). For example if you read any car
buying guide, it will list out what is there in one model car and what is not there
compared to another model. Some body might have a personal bias towards a
particular vendor.
But remember that if we are not good with all the products(rdbms) , and stick to our
favourite one ---we will perish like an apple/orange in this market;).
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/compare/mythandreality.asp
Hello Friends, Can any one give me the difference b/w oracle 8i and 9i
Thanks
1i
Caching in Oracle in the lites of PCTs is much better and powerfull than in that of
SQL server.Also you can get the source code of Oracle!!
unrelated
خليفه اول خليفۂ رسول ال صلی اللہ عليہ وسلم بل فصل
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.
What about SQL Servers DTS capabilities? No one rating these? I favour SQL Server
for small quick business solutions on a budget, and Oracle for large scalable big
budget solutions.
-- oracsqlserve (none@none.co.uk), 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 will
refute that 5. Replication is much easier in SQL (I have been at clients where even the
Oracle consultant couldn't get it working w/oracle) 6. Fail over support in SQL is
much, much easier 7. JDBC support is much better in Oracle, although Microsoft is
working on it 8. ODBC support in both 9. SQL is ANSI-SQL '92 compliant, making it
easier to convert to another ANSI compliant database, theoretically anyway (truth is
every database has proprietary extensions). Oracle is generally more proprietary and
their main goal is to keep their customers locked-in. 10. SQL natively supports
ODBC, OLEDB, XML, XML Query, XML updates. Oracle natively supports
proprietary connections, JDBC. Not sure about XML support though. 11. SQL Server
is much easier to administrate, with GUI and command- line tools. Most of Oracle is
command-line (Back in SQL 6.5 days I had a customer who was so proud that after a
day'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, fail
over, 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 Oracle it
is a separate purchase. 14. 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 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 used
especially in large database. But if we use sql server in such a environment, the data
processing will become very slower. Oracle database very closely supports Java rather
than Sql server.
dfsdf
Thank you very much :) all of you .. becuase of this healthy discussion i have known
few facts relating to the differnece b/w then .. I think we should give credit to
Subramani who had very good points and did hard work to let us know things ..
thankx alot you
Ali
Please any body can send me the differences cetween sqlserver and oracle.
A few "corrections" from a long-time SQL Server user... - Bitmap indexing is rarely
ever missed in SQL server, due to other indexing/optimizing techniques - Stored
procedure plans are indeed retained in a compiled state, it is blatantly false to say that
they are recompiled every time - Statistics are much easier to manage in SQL, but you
can get far more fine-grained control in Oracle - Generally speaking, SQL query
optimizer is far far more reliable in SQL; query hints are used rarely, if ever. That
said, every database will have at least some optimizer glitches, and it is up to the
database developer to discover and fix them (usually with hints) - Generally testing
performance is easy in SQL, with easily accessible query plans and statistics. These
can be obtained from Oracle but are much more challenging. Same for profile/trace of
database activity. - Very generally speaking, SQL uses far less memory and performs
noticably better out of the box than Oracle. But because of Oracle's fine-tuning
capabilities, a *skilled* DBA can get better performance out of Oracle. - SQL can
indeed do range partitioning, but it must be done manually (where I think for example
DB2 can do it automatically by hash) - see "partitioned views"
Helpful wins for Oracle: - runs on *nix (for many, this ends the debate immediately) -
exception handling in pl/sql dialect - functon based indexes are occasionally very
useful - but hard to rely upon (must write queries to exactly match the function usage)
- can be heavily tuned for specific use cases; you rarely hit a dead-end optimizing
oracle (if you have a very very skilled dba) - readers never block - standalone
sequences are sometimes more useful than SQL IDENTITY - oracle supports more
efficient constructs for fetching resultant data values during insert/update operations,
and for advanced bulk operations
Helpful wins for SQL: - runs great out of the box - free excellent management,
profiling, monitoring tools - excellent query optimizer - rarely needs any tuning at all
(but when you do, the options are few; wysiwyg) - included top-notch OLAP tool and
full-text search; competitive with much more expensive solutions - much less memory
and compute intensive (probably due to cheaper concurrency model and lighter
configuration options!) - SQL also caches query plans of recent statements in an LRU
cache - frequently used statements do not need recompiles, even without procedures
Big difference: very different concurrency model between SQL and Oracle. Oracle
operates against point-in-time(log) snapshots of the data (using SCNs), but acquires
those on demand. Therefore readers never block. In SQL, you have more choices of
isolation/concurrency, but the more aggressive settings will have writers block
readers, and the most aggressive can have readers block writers. In classic RDBMS
this is not too bad - but in complex deep relations such as OORDBMS-over-RDBMS
or other object-graph storage solutions, deadlocks can really hurt your project unless
you can scale some queries back to Read Committed isolation level.
1.Oracle is platform independent 2.Oracle has in built jvm we can include java classes
into it. 3.Sql server has better gui than oracle 4.Sql server has better perfomance in
backups,replication,recovery 5.There is no synonym database object in sql server,no
package 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.
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 gaand
marwaoge kya ... aisi hi sites pe jaake plz plz karke answer mangoge......tumhari maa
bhen di ta mai... Gaand marao saalo
Are yar tiger ... kya tune e londo ko bahut galiya diya. Are thoda shikhade ne yar..
Apne desh ka nam roshan karenge.
Thank you all for these great answers, I have been looking for a succinct precis like
this for a while, you have saved me much wading through sales material.
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, HP 9000 Series HP-UX,
Linux Intel, Sun Solaris and so on.
It is very difficult to make the performance comparison between SQL Server 2000
and Oracle 9i Database. The performance of your databases depends rather from the
experience of the database developers and database administrator than from the
database's provider. You can use both of these RDBMS to build stable and efficient
system. However, it is possible to define the typical transactions, which used in
inventory control systems, airline reservation systems and banking systems. After
defining these typical transactions, it is possible to run them under the different
database management systems working on the different hardware and software
platforms. Both SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i Database support the ANSI SQL-92
entry level and do not support the ANSI SQL-92 intermediate level. In the Features
comparison 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.
SQL Server 2000 vs Oracle 9i Alexander Chigrik chigrik@mssqlcity.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------
Introduction Platform comparison Hardware requirements Software requirements
Performance 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 and
Microsoft SQL Server. In this article, I compare SQL Server 2000 with Oracle 9i
Database regarding 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, HP
9000 Series HP-UX, Linux Intel, Sun Solaris and so on.
Hardware requirements To install SQL Server 2000, you should have the Intel or
compatible platforms and the following hardware:
Hardware Requirements Processor Pentium 166 MHz or higher Memory 32 MB
RAM (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), 250
MB (typical), 95 MB (minimum), Desktop Engine: 44 MB Analysis Services: 50 MB
minimum and 130 MB typical English Query: 80 MB
Oracle 9i supports Intel or compatible platforms, AIX-Based Systems, Compaq Tru64
UNIX, 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 the
following hardware:
Hardware Requirements Processor Pentium 166 MHz or higher Memory RAM: 128
MB (256 MB recommended) Virtual Memory: Initial Size 200 MB, Maximum Size
400 MB Hard disk space 140 MB on the System Drive plus 4.5 GB 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 RAM Swap Space A
minimum 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 for
Windows CE) and requires the following software:
Operating System Enterprise Edition Standard Edition Personal Edition Developer
Edition Desktop Engine SQL Server 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 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 2000
Server Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Windows 2000 Advanced Server Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes No Windows 2000 DataCenter Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Windows XP
Professional No No Yes Yes Yes No
Oracle 9i Database comes in three editions: Enterprise, Standard and Personal and
requires the following software:
Platform Operating System Version Required Patches Windows-based Windows NT
4.0 Service Pack 5 Windows-based Windows 2000 Service Pack 1 Windows-based
Windows 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 5.1
ML01+ (IY22854), IY26778, IY28766, IY28949, IY29965, IY30150 Compaq Tru64
UNIX Tru64 5.1 5.1 patchkit 4 Compaq Tru64 UNIX Tru64 5.1A 5.1A patchkit 1
HP-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 your
databases depends rather from the experience of the database developers and database
administrator than from the database's provider. You can use both of these RDBMS to
build stable and efficient system. However, it is possible to define the typical
transactions, which used in inventory control systems, airline reservation systems and
banking systems. After defining these typical transactions, it is possible to run them
under the different database management systems working on the different hardware
and software platforms.
TPC tests The Transaction Processing Performance Council (TPC.Org) is independent
organization that specifies the typical transactions (transactions used in inventory
control systems, airline reservation systems and banking systems) and some general
rules these transactions should satisfy.
The TPC produces benchmarks that measure transaction processing and database
performance in terms of how many transactions a given system and database can
perform 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 most
popular test is the TPC-C test (OLTP test).
At the moment the article was wrote, SQL Server 2000 held the top TPC-C by
performance results with Distributed Partitioned Views- based cluster systems. See
Top Ten TPC-C by Performance Version 5 Results
At the moment the article was wrote, SQL Server 2000 held the top TPC-C by
price/performance results. See Top Ten TPC-C by Price/Performance Version 5
Results
Note. Because most organizations really do not run very large databases, so the key
points on which SQL Server 2000 won the TPC-C benchmarks do not really matter to
the vast majority of companies.
Price comparison One of the main Microsoft SQL Server 2000 advantage in
comparison with Oracle 9i Database is that SQL Server is cheaper. Other SQL Server
advantage is that Microsoft includes the Online analytical processing (OLAP) and
Data Mining as standard features in SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition. So, you can
save up to four times with SQL Server 2000 Enterprise Edition if you use OLAP and
Data Mining.
The price comparisons below were based on the Oracle and SQL Server 2000 Price
Comparison article from Microsoft.
Compare pricing for SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition and Oracle9i Standard
Edition:
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 and
Data Mining) and Oracle9i Enterprise Edition with OLAP and/or Data Mining:
Number of CPUs Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Oracle9i Enterprise Edition with OLAP
or Data Mining Oracle9i Enterprise Edition With OLAP and Data Mining SQL Server
2000 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 9i
Database. It is only a brief comparison. You can have any discounts and the prices can
be increased or decreased in the future. See Microsoft and Oracle to get more
information about the price of their products.
Features comparison Both SQL Server 2000 and Oracle 9i Database support the ANSI
SQL-92 entry level and do not support the ANSI SQL-92 intermediate level. In the
Features comparison 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.
T-SQL vs PL/SQL The dialect of SQL supported by Microsoft SQL Server 2000 is
called Transact-SQL (T-SQL). The dialect of SQL supported by Oracle 9i Database is
called PL/SQL. PL/SQL is more powerful language than T- SQL
Thanx for the discussion, if u find the better one mail to me skgs55@yahoo.com
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 best
SmitP