SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i
This is interesting: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020403/sfw026_1.html Ken Janusz, CPIM
Re: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i
Consider the source. Igor Neyman, OCP DBA[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: KENNETH JANUSZ To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:03 AM Subject: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i This is interesting: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020403/sfw026_1.html Ken Janusz, CPIM
RE: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i
I bet following variable is set in the test _ignore_downtime_cost=true; _ignore_reboots_cost=true; Raj __ Rajendra Jamadagni MIS, ESPN Inc. Rajendra dot Jamadagni at ESPN dot com Any opinion expressed here is personal and doesn't reflect that of ESPN Inc. QOTD: Any clod can have facts, but having an opinion is an art! ***1 This e-mail message is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s) above and may contain information that is privileged, attorney work product or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please immediately notify ESPN at (860) 766-2000 and delete this e-mail message from your computer, Thank you. ***1
Re: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i
yeah but it was written by MS. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/03/02 10:03AM This is interesting: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020403/sfw026_1.html Ken Janusz, CPIM -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: Gene Sais INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
RE: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i
The Walklett Group, the author of the paper cited, is a consulting/services company and has Microsoft listed on their "Alliances" web page, although the exact nature of the relationship is not defined. The paper makes a number of assumptions that I would question. After reading it, I do not find it to be a persuasive arguement in favor of the solution recommended (microsoft SQL Server on a Unisys box). read the white paper for yourself at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/compare/WalklettAnalysis.pdf Matt Adams - GE Appliances - [EMAIL PROTECTED]If C gives you engouth rope to hang yourself, then C++ givesyou enough rope to hang yourself, your dog, your co-workers,and everyone in your neighborhood. -Original Message-From: KENNETH JANUSZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:04 AMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i This is interesting: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020403/sfw026_1.html Ken Janusz, CPIM
RE: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i
But a clueless CIO or IT Director might be persuaded...and that is the problem. Even more so, when the IT budget is tight...and when is the IT budget not tight?? -Original Message-From: Adams, Matthew (GEA, 088130) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 11:23 AMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i The Walklett Group, the author of the paper cited, is a consulting/services company and has Microsoft listed on their "Alliances" web page, although the exact nature of the relationship is not defined. The paper makes a number of assumptions that I would question. After reading it, I do not find it to be a persuasive arguement in favor of the solution recommended (microsoft SQL Server on a Unisys box). read the white paper for yourself at http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/compare/WalklettAnalysis.pdf Matt Adams - GE Appliances - [EMAIL PROTECTED]If C gives you engouth rope to hang yourself, then C++ givesyou enough rope to hang yourself, your dog, your co-workers,and everyone in your neighborhood. -Original Message-From: KENNETH JANUSZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:04 AMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i This is interesting: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020403/sfw026_1.html Ken Janusz, CPIM
Re: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i
And I charge less than Steve Adams or Jonathan Lewis (3.5 times lesser), for 'comparable' features (could be physical). So, hire me, and Save a million in 5 years. Who buys that? ;-) Raj Gene Sais [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L [EMAIL PROTECTED] ach.fl.us cc: Sent by: Subject: Re: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i [EMAIL PROTECTED] April 03, 2002 10:53 AM Please respond to ORACLE-L yeah but it was written by MS. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/03/02 10:03AM This is interesting: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020403/sfw026_1.html Ken Janusz, CPIM -- Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com -- Author: INET: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fat City Network Services-- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San Diego, California-- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing).
Re: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i
It's fascinating when somebody proclaims "50% savings in TCO over a 5 year period" when it is patently obvious that A)such aconfiguration has not existed over the past five years and B) it will never exist over any contiguous five year period. The lifecycle of systems doesn't happen that way. Back in the 1980s when the US space shuttle "Challenger" explosion was being investigated by a panel of eminent politicians, lawyers, and scientists, Nobel-laureate physicist Richard Feynmannsingled outNASA testimony stating that the "Challenger" explosion could only happen in 1 out of 100,000 launches. Noting that US space shuttles had been launchedabout 50-60 times up to that point, he asked how anyone could possiblyproject odds of "1 out of 100,000", never mind try to pass it off as "fact". When I read about TCO on a configurationgoing forward5 years, I wonder if those people are on-call and wearing pagers, or whether they know anybody who is... - Original Message - From: KENNETH JANUSZ To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 8:03 AM Subject: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i This is interesting: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020403/sfw026_1.html Ken Janusz, CPIM
Re: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i
Hi Tim, Nice to see you here -bill At 01:03 PM 4/3/2002 -0800, you wrote: It's fascinating when somebody proclaims 50% savings in TCO over a 5 year period when it is patently obvious that A) such a configuration has not existed over the past five years and B) it will never exist over any contiguous five year period. The lifecycle of systems doesn't happen that way. Back in the 1980s when the US space shuttle Challenger explosion was being investigated by a panel of eminent politicians, lawyers, and scientists, Nobel-laureate physicist Richard Feynmann singled out NASA testimony stating that the Challenger explosion could only happen in 1 out of 100,000 launches. Noting that US space shuttles had been launched about 50-60 times up to that point, he asked how anyone could possibly project odds of 1 out of 100,000, never mind try to pass it off as fact. When I read about TCO on a configuration going forward 5 years, I wonder if those people are on-call and wearing pagers, or whether they know anybody who is... - Original Message - From: KENNETH JANUSZ To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 8:03 AM Subject: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i This is interesting: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020403/sfw026_1.html Ken Janusz, CPIM
Re: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i
Just think of what the savings would be over a 50 year period! WOW! Ken - Original Message - From: Tim Gorman To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 3:03 PM Subject: Re: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i It's fascinating when somebody proclaims "50% savings in TCO over a 5 year period" when it is patently obvious that A)such aconfiguration has not existed over the past five years and B) it will never exist over any contiguous five year period. The lifecycle of systems doesn't happen that way. Back in the 1980s when the US space shuttle "Challenger" explosion was being investigated by a panel of eminent politicians, lawyers, and scientists, Nobel-laureate physicist Richard Feynmannsingled outNASA testimony stating that the "Challenger" explosion could only happen in 1 out of 100,000 launches. Noting that US space shuttles had been launchedabout 50-60 times up to that point, he asked how anyone could possiblyproject odds of "1 out of 100,000", never mind try to pass it off as "fact". When I read about TCO on a configurationgoing forward5 years, I wonder if those people are on-call and wearing pagers, or whether they know anybody who is... - Original Message - From: KENNETH JANUSZ To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 8:03 AM Subject: SQL Server vs. Oracle 9i This is interesting: http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020403/sfw026_1.html Ken Janusz, CPIM
