S
Sahil Malik [MVP]
Yuri,
Thanks for your views. I do agree with your views in many dimensions, but I
disagree that SQL Server 2005 (not 2000) cannot be used appropriately to run
on a 2 TB database. In fact, even SQL2k can do that (really depends on your
DBA).
I agree with your assessment on rollbacks.
Now one thing that I'd like to point in addition to your answer below is
"Licensing Cost". And once you consider that, the little bit of pain SQL2k5
will give you in comparison with Oracle, is worth the multi million $
savings, don't you think?
- Sahil Malik [MVP]
ADO.NET 2.0 book -
http://codebetter.com/blogs/sahil.malik/archive/2005/05/13/63199.aspx
Thanks for your views. I do agree with your views in many dimensions, but I
disagree that SQL Server 2005 (not 2000) cannot be used appropriately to run
on a 2 TB database. In fact, even SQL2k can do that (really depends on your
DBA).
I agree with your assessment on rollbacks.
Now one thing that I'd like to point in addition to your answer below is
"Licensing Cost". And once you consider that, the little bit of pain SQL2k5
will give you in comparison with Oracle, is worth the multi million $
savings, don't you think?
- Sahil Malik [MVP]
ADO.NET 2.0 book -
http://codebetter.com/blogs/sahil.malik/archive/2005/05/13/63199.aspx