I agree on the bias regarding the JDBC drivers. But I don't think that Win2k/ODBC/ASP performance is relavent either - We're talking about RDB'S that run on multiple platforms here, not just a single all-MS stack.
> Heh, this article truely cannot be used as ammunition for any anti-MS > people. They do all this testing with beta JDBC drivers, and pronouce MySQL > and Oracle winners, then they throw in one sentence on how under > Win2k/ODBC/ASP outperformed all of them by over 300 page view per second but > it really doesn't count. lol > > jon > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 4:28 PM > Subject: RE: MS SQL vs MySQL WAS: [admin] List status > > > > article here > > > > http://www.eweek.com/article/0,3658,s=708&a=23115,00.asp > > > > > > also you have to take into account that they were using JDBC drivers and > > MSSQL had problems. > > > > Quoted: > > Due to its significant JDBC (Java Database Connectivity) driver problems, > > SQL Server was limited to about 200 pages per second for the entire test. > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
