I use both extensively and switch between them often without even
thinking about which one I'm using until I get a query error - mostly
on the things already mentioned like identity or triggers. The basic
SQL for queries is very similar.
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 7:19 PM, C. Hatton Humphrey <[EMAIL
Cool.. I havent used MSSQL (as I said earlier). My company used Oracle
9i currently and are in the process of upgrading to 10g.
To each his own, aye?
On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Jochem van Dieten
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ** Private ** wrote:
> > One of the features I absoluetly love about
** Private ** wrote:
> One of the features I absoluetly love about Oracle is the over() function..
> If you have a recordset and are trying to get multiple sums of columns
> grouped by different columns..
> in MSSQL you'd have to create multiple queries right?
MS SQL Server has the standard SQL Wi
One of the features I absoluetly love about Oracle is the over() function..
If you have a recordset and are trying to get multiple sums of columns
grouped by different columns..
in MSSQL you'd have to create multiple queries right?
select sum(a, b)
from foo
group by c
select sum(a, c)
from foo
gro
They are essentially the same for more of your everyday queries. There are
a couple of minor differences (like the TOP keyword), but mostly they are
the same syntax-wise. When you get into more advanced stuff (like triggers)
they do differ.
Also worth noting - CF Standard supports MS SQL out of
> 20M+ rows in MSSQL works just fine. Especially in SQL 2005 and SQL 2008.
+1 , SQL Server 2005 when properly tuned is great. And proper tuning
in 2005 is a lot closer to OOTB than in 2000.
--
will
"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable."
- Carr
See in those instances where we were dealing with huge record sets (DoD
and NIH) we used DB2 on zOS, better performance, and these were from
legacy mainframe systems.
Greg Morphis wrote:
> Doesn't work for me.. I wouldnt go to either..
> Yuk!
>
> I think if you use any DB exclusively, things ju
ooo ooo
I know this one!
He can type, and is genuinely creative
Dana
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 10:00 PM, morchella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> ok adam.
> i am calling bs o this one..
> either you can type & are genuanily creative.
> or you have paragraphs of analogies you can can copy and paste.
** Private ** wrote:
> What is the difference between CF + MSSQL and CF + Oracle?
>
> Is the query structure for Oracle that much different?
If all you do is "SELECT field FROM table WHERE field = value" then the
difference is that Oracle is harder to set up but will run on more platforms.
http
gt; Subject: Re: Help me understand the difference... (Tech question)
>
> Doesn't work for me.. I wouldnt go to either..
> Yuk!
>
> I think if you use any DB exclusively, things just become easier with
> it.
> And yeah we have 20+ million row tables.. Oracle work like a
I just typed it out as I thought of it.
Respectfully,
Adam Phillip Churvis
President
Productivity Enhancement
> -Original Message-
> From: morchella [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 12:00 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Help me understand
sry..
its time to go to bed..
i like both dolly & jlow
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 12:00 AM, morchella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> ok adam.
> i am calling bs o this one..
> either you can type & are genuanily creative.
> or you have paragraphs of analogies you can can copy and paste..
> sure i am wro
Doesn't work for me.. I wouldnt go to either..
Yuk!
I think if you use any DB exclusively, things just become easier with it.
And yeah we have 20+ million row tables.. Oracle work like a charm
(properly partitioned and indexed of course).
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 10:54 PM, Adam Churvis
<[EMAIL PROT
ok adam.
i am calling bs o this one..
either you can type & are genuanily creative.
or you have paragraphs of analogies you can can copy and paste..
sure i am wrong..
but this just took me 3 minutes to type..
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 11:54 PM, Adam Churvis <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mainly it'
s [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 11:41 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Help me understand the difference... (Tech question)
>
> Difficult?
>
> Care to elaborate?
>
>
> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Loathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> Mainly it's just a bigger pain in the ass to use oracle.
Amen to that, brother!
Oracle is kinda like Jennifer Lopez, and MSSQL is kinda like Dolly Parton.
If you're easily amazed, Jennifer Lopez does it for you at first and you
feel really privileged to have her perform for you. You get use
Everything requires more lines of code.
I like CF over say PHP, it's easier and quicker to write.
I feel the same way about the SQL Server/Oracle debate.
Also you have to write code for damned near everything you do with
oracle, with SQL Server you can do 95% of it visually. Yes I know that
t
Difficult?
Care to elaborate?
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Loathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> God,
>
> Mainly it's just a bigger pain in the ass to use oracle.
>
> You have to write all your own sequences and triggers, when in SQL
> Server you get identity fields.
>
> Also the visual tools
For one thing, the trigger model is entirely different between the two
platforms.
The one advantage Oracle really has over MSSQL is its trigger model. There
are 14 different types of triggers in Oracle, dealing with both row-level
(which MSSQL doesn't have) and set-level operations, schema-leve
God,
Mainly it's just a bigger pain in the ass to use oracle.
You have to write all your own sequences and triggers, when in SQL
Server you get identity fields.
Also the visual tools for SQL Server are just a lot nicer. Theres more
than that, major code differences, seems like everything is m
As an Oracle user.. I don't think there's much difference in standard
DB things.. they're both ANSI compliant..
I'm sure MSSQL has some specific features, as does Oracle..
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 9:35 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's been while since I've done it, but there
It's been while since I've done it, but there was a huge difference in how
the joins were made in Oracle vs MSSql and the stored procs are very
different also.
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 9:19 PM, C. Hatton Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> What is the difference between CF + MSSQL and CF + Oracl
22 matches
Mail list logo
