> At 10:16 AM 4/5/2002, you wrote: > >Actually, according to the objective eWeek test results at the link > >provided in another reply, the gap between Oracle 9i and MySQL 4.x is > >rather slim... > > Gregory, > A point that was sadly missing from that article was > what was the > cost to create the Oracle webserver? How much did it cost to > purchase the > Oracle software and how much were the license fees to > support that many > concurrent users. How much was the administration software > for the Oracle > database? What was the yearly support for tech support? What > did it cost > for tech support (in hours) to fine tune the database? Then > compare those > figures to MySQL and you'll start to see the real advantage of MySQL. > > If anyone has these costs worked out for the Oracle vs MySQL > webserver benchmark that appeared in e-Week and PC Mag, I > think a lot of > people would be interested in seeing it. I know I would. > > Brent
Agreed, but the article was solely about the technical merits of the various solutions. FYI (general consumption), both Sybase and MySQL sent people to the test floor, IBM provided email support, Oracle and Microsoft declined to be involved. I would say that the lower TCO of MySQL compared to Oracle would be a deciding factor in many cases (given a relatively equivalent feature set). Don't get me wrong; I'm certainly not an Oracle schill. I harbor a deep and ancestral hatred for Oracle's database server software, especially from an admin standpoint. I was simply highlighting the fact that in plain technical terms, MySQL was right there with Oracle, and far and above the other offerings. Anything on top of that (the TCO issues you raise, for example) are above and beyond that. I have to admit that I have not yet tried the .NET/OLEDB interfaces to MySQL, and honestly, am not willing to until the SP support in MySQL is fully functional. I will say that all of the VS/ADO/.NET development I am doing for IIS/MSSQL is being done with an emphasis on easily migrating to MySQL in the future (for example, making sure that I don't use any Microsoft-specific constructs on the database side). Why am I still working with MS technologies? Because they work together well (as the article also stated), and at this time I am more interested in shorter development time (which VS.NET provides in spades) than in "purity of ideology". VS.NET/IIS/.NET Framework/MSQQL 2K works fine for me for now, but as soon as I can plug in MySQL on the back end without missing a beat I'm there. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Before posting, please check: http://www.mysql.com/manual.php (the manual) http://lists.mysql.com/ (the list archive) To request this thread, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Trouble unsubscribing? Try: http://lists.mysql.com/php/unsubscribe.php
