Re: Democracy and organisation : let's make a

Dann,

> Totally false:
> http://www.microsoft.com/sql/evaluation/compare/benchmarks.asp

The microsoft benchmarks aren't worth the screen space they take up. I don't
consider these "evidence". I'm basing this on real experience of working
with real production databases, not some idealized benchmark database
directly admined by the SQL Server developers in Redmond.

> False again. There is a problem if the clusted objects are added always
> to the end of the file, or are constantly hitting the same data page.
> This is often solved by creation of a hashed index that is clustered.
> Then, the new writes are going to different pages.

Depends on your level of write activity, and the size of the records.
Clustered indexes work nicely for some tables. Not for others.

> That's a configuration error.

Yes? And you're going to tell me how to fix it? I've tinkered with the
memory alloction in the SQL server config; the best I seem to be able to do
is make SQL server crash instead of NT.

> It's still a great product with better features than PostgreSQL.

Once again, I disagree. It has *different* features, and if your focus is
GUI tools or Win32 tool integration, you might say it's "better" than
Postgres. But you'd have to admit that Postgres has some features and
options that MS SQL can't match, such as SQL standard compliance, TOAST,
hackable system tables, etc.

Also, as I said, I've not worked much with SQL Server 2000. MS may have
improved the product's reliability since 7.0.

> I have worked as an MS SQL Server DBA (also database designer and
> programmer along with just about anything else that could be done with
> it) and am aware of the difficulties associated with SQL Server. It's a
> very good product.

Until it crashes. Unrecoverably. Don't scoff. I've had it happen, and the
only thing that saved me was triplicate backup of the database.

> Customer support is also a big issue comparing free database systems
> with commercial ones. I know that there are a couple groups that do
> this, but that genre of businesses do not have a good track record of
> staying in business. MS, Oracle, and IBM will be there five years down
> the road to help.

If you can afford the fees. Personally, I've received more help from the
PGSQL-SQL list than I ever got out of my $3000/year MSDN subscription.

Also, PostgreSQL Inc. offers some great support. I've used it.

> One area where there is a monumental difference is in license fees. For
> a single corporation, it does not matter. But for someone who writes
> database applications that will be delivered to thousands of customers,
> it is an enormous advantage.

Yup.

--
-Josh Berkus