SQL Server Performance Forum – Threads Archive

SQL or Oracle

Hi All, We are planning for a new project having a database size of more than 100GB.
Our project will work some what in this manner,
The daily entries will be kept in the memory for that particular day.
But the entries previous to that will be transferred to som specific tables in the database, on a daily basis.
We are confused as to use SQL or Oracle for designing the database.
Is maintanence in Oracle better than SQL.
Please suggest as to which to be used Regards
Riya

I believe 100GB or some more data is not much for SQL server.. if database is designed/ maintained and hosted on calculated hardware. I suppose transaction/per second is an importent factor. My Experience says SQL has got easy Installation/ Handling/ Maintenance/ Support compared to Oracle.. [May be cause i haven’t work much on oracle]
"The daily entries will be kept in the memory for that particular day."
–What exactly you are trying to say by above statement? Deepak Kumar –An eye for an eye and everyone shall be blind

Hi All, Sorry DB size will be more than 1000 Gigabytes ie 1000 Gigabytes = 1 Terabyte Sorry for the wrong input… Regards Riya

I have seen/worked on more then 450Gb data size of SQL databases..but once again it depends on transction/per second..how many users connects and what is the scope of avilablity/ response time.
[There are some cases when its hard to manage 20Gb db cause of high transaction rate]
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/administration/2000/scalability.asp http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/chats/trans/sql/sql0326.mspx Deepak Kumar –An eye for an eye and everyone shall be blind

1000 GB is not an issue with SQL Server and also you need look into the other parameters as well.
http://www.mssqlcity.com/Articles/Compare/sql_server_vs_oracle.htm
http://www.dba-oracle.com/oracle_tips_oracle_v_sql_server.htm

Try to make an estimate of work and transactions, find max workload during bussiness hour for that SQL server application. and recalucate requirments and features avilable in SQL/ Oracle. Also Server hardware will play an important role. but this need to be choosen keeping database/ user growth in consideration. Deepak Kumar –An eye for an eye and everyone shall be blind

You will get suggestion with regard to SQL Server only as you’re inviting a long debate on a rivalry product. Anyway in your case SQL Server will have no issues in supporting that size of database, provided if you want to have performance then make sure to purchase enterprise edition of SQL to take advantage of higher resource usage. As referred by Deepak make sure to choose correct hardware in this regard, have a look at MS site about HCL requirements. Satya SKJ
Moderator
http://www.SQL-Server-Performance.Com/forum
This posting is provided â€œAS ISâ€ with no rights for the sake of knowledge sharing.

Nobody considers even a 1 TB database that large these days.
SQL Server can surely handle this. The next version probably even better. However, when you know in advance that your db will get that large, other things come to mind as well.
The schema itself, the hardware, the application. It might be a good idea to buy some consulting advices from a consultant with proven expertise in this area. Anyway, see if these links will provide additional information:
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/administration/2000/rosetta.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/administration/2000/scalabilityfaq.asp
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/sql/2000/plan/ssmsam.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/administration/2000/scalability.asp
—
Frank Kalis
Microsoft SQL Server MVP
http://www.insidesql.de
Ich unterstÃ¼tze PASS Deutschland e.V. http://www.sqlpass.de)

]]>