I agree about MS-SQL being maintenance light, cheap, and at the same time a
fairly robust database, which has a winning point on case sensitivity..
But because of the nature of searches and the format data is stored in your
organization, if case insensitivity isn't going to buy much and you'll
already have a full time Oracle DBA, I would go with Oracle as Oracle tends
to be more flexible on certain maintenance standpoints than MS-SQL can ever
be to the best of my knowledge.. I'm not even a fully qualified Oracle DBA
nor am I a fully qualified MS-SQL DBA, and I find Oracles scripting
capacities far more superior than MS-SQL. For e.g. I have in the past been
able to script oracle backups and restore, selecting specific parameters to
export and import (only structures, only data, only certain tables or views,
etc) in scripts that has given me the ability to pretty much replicate
production databases minus all the application data.. I really do not think
there is a way to do the same in MS-SQL, but then I could be wrong... I just
may have not found a way to script that in MS-SQL...
All in all I agree with most of the comments on this thread as well as one
similar to this a few weeks ago, MS-SQL can be fairly cheaper and easier to
maintain than Oracle which would need an expensive full time DBA..
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Pierson, Shawn
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 11:23 AM Newsgroups:
public.remedy.arsystem.general
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: SQL or Oracle
SQL Server is cheaper and easier to manage. It works better when it comes
to case sensitivity. For the amount of users you have, there are no
performance advantages or anything when it comes to Oracle. Basically,
Remedy works perfectly fine on both, but you should use whatever you and
your DBAs are more comfortable with, and what works on the hardware and OS
you are using (e.g. you can't run SQL Server on Linux but you can run
Oracle.) Management should listen at least to the dollars involved if you
are purchasing new licenses, as SQL Server Standard is a whole lot cheaper
than Oracle.
Thanks,
Shawn Pierson
Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer
-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Hennigan, Sandra
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 9:08 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: SQL or Oracle
All,
I am setting up a brand new ARS with ITSM. The big decision is whether to go
with SQL or Oracle as the backend.
I prefer SQL; management thinks Oracle.
Without starting a frightening Friday foray on the List, does anyone (LOL)
on the list have an opinion? I really need some feedback with the Pros &
Cons of using either DB that I can take to my managers.
So you know, the system is for an organization that will support about 3000
end users (Support staff plus customers). We have the entire ITSM suite to
deploy which will be accomplished in stages. We will start with Asset and
Incident Management then move onto Change and Release then to SRM.
Anyone?
Thank you,
Sandra Hennigan
Remedy Developer
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12
www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Private and confidential as detailed here:
http://www.sug.com/disclaimers/default.htm#Mail . If you cannot access the
link, please e-mail sender.
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
