For those of us
plagued by marketing hype about why you should run your databases on SQL
Server & Windows vs. Oracle on Linux:
Here are related notes comparing SQL Server to Oracle:
SearchDatabase.com has recently published at detailed
comparison of the relative merits of
Oracle Vs. SQL Server:
The evaluator, Eli
Leiba, works at the Israel Electric Company as a senior
application DBA in Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server, and has
certifications in Oracle and SQL Server database administration and
implementation. Additionally, Mr. Leiba teaches SQL Server DBA and
development courses at the Microsoft CTEC.
Leiba compares SQL
Server to Oracle along the following lines:
For example, here
are Mr. Leiba?s comparison of Oracle vs. SQL Server performance
features:
-
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.
-
In SQL Server,
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.
-
In SQL Server,
no range partitioning 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.
-
There is no
partitioning in SQL Server.
-
There are no
bitmap indexes in SQL Server.
-
There are no
reverse key indexes in SQL Server.
-
There are no
function-based indexes in SQL Server.
-
There is no star
query optimization in SQL Server.
Tony Jambu Notes:
Oracle 10g vs. SQL Server
Given the release of 10gR2, Oracle seems to be moving ahead of its
competitors. But where are its competitors in terms of their technical
features? The one database competitor we hear a lot about is Microsoft's
SQL Server.
With its imminent release of MS-SQL Server 2005 also known as Yukon, it
pays to be aware of it strengths and weaknesses as compared to Oracle's
10g.
The hard work of
comparing the two
databases, Oracle 10g and MS-SQL Server 2005 (beta) has been done by
David Gornshtein and Boris Tamarkin of WisdomForce Technologies, Inc
David and Boris have produced a comprehensive technical whitepaper
comparing their features, strengths and weaknesses. This has to be the
most detailed and unbiased report I have come across. They definitely
have an in-depth knowledge of both Oracle 10g and MS-SQL Server 2005
(beta). The report is being quoted on all the major trade websites. Just
do a search on "Oracle 10g and MS-SQL Server 2005" and you will find
this report turning up every where.
Did you know that MS-SQL Server 2005 now has:
- New locking mechanisms. Writers don't block readers (yawn).
- With Snapshot Isolation (SI) there is data consistency on transaction
begin.
- With "Read committed snapshot" isolation level which provides for read
consistency.
- New online data and index reorganization
- Physical table and indexing portioning
- The use of Btree for indexes
- Specialized index on a computed column (ala Function based Index)
- Indexed View (ala Materialized Views)
- Replication via Peer-to-Peer Transaction replication and Database
mirroring
- More online backup and recovery options
