RDBMS server engines - an overview?

[Mike MacSween]

Has anybody seen one? Or care to offer (a brief) one? Yes, I've done some
searching of the archives. Anybody who's read my posts over the past couple
of years (and there must be at least one or two of you!) will know my only
real experience is with Access/Jet. But it's becoming clear to me that for
career's sake I've got to expand my skill set. MS SQL Server is first on the
list, not because it's necessarily the best/most cost effective or whatever,
but because people use it, and I like the look of ADPs. But if I'm
reccomending client(prob Access)/server solutions to customers, what are the
opinions on:

PostGreSQL

MySQL

Oracle

MS SQL Server

DB2

etc.

That's a bit of a broad question, sorry. I'm just after general comparisons
really. And I respect the opinions of the people here.

TIA, Mike MacSween

[cafe]

An interesting technical characteristic of Oracle, is that it offers the
following four things simultaneously:
o a consistent view of the data returned by each SELECT,
o regardless of how long the SELECT takes to execute,
o even if other processes are comitting updates to the selected records
at the same time, and
o without holding any locks!!

This can be important when:
o there is a very high data entry/update load,
o there are concurrent queries for reports etc.,
o it is essential for those reports to present a consistent view of the
data at one single point in time, and
o it is not acceptable to achive that using data locks (thereby slowing
or suspending other processes).

Oracle also has the full complement of heavy-duty transaction processing &
point-in-time recovery. (As you are doubtless aware, Jet transactions are
not transactions at all. They *do not* guarantee that all the data in the
transaction is saved, or not saved, & the database is left in one of those
two states.)

HTH,
TC
"Mike MacSween" <mi************ ******@btintern et.com> wrote in message
news:3f******** *************@p ubnews.gradwell .net...

Has anybody seen one? Or care to offer (a brief) one? Yes, I've done some
searching of the archives. Anybody who's read my posts over the past couple of years (and there must be at least one or two of you!) will know my only
real experience is with Access/Jet. But it's becoming clear to me that for
career's sake I've got to expand my skill set. MS SQL Server is first on the list, not because it's necessarily the best/most cost effective or whatever, but because people use it, and I like the look of ADPs. But if I'm
reccomending client(prob Access)/server solutions to customers, what are the opinions on:

PostGreSQL
MySQL
Oracle
MS SQL Server
DB2
etc.

That's a bit of a broad question, sorry. I'm just after general comparisons really. And I respect the opinions of the people here.

TIA, Mike MacSween

[TC]

So - Oracle it is, Mike!

TC
"Mike MacSween" <mi************ ******@btintern et.com> wrote in message
news:3f******** *************@p ubnews.gradwell .net...

Has anybody seen one? (snip)

[Mike MacSween]

"TC" <a@b.c.d> wrote in message news:1064117934 .400231@teuthos ...

So - Oracle it is, Mike!

Yup, looks like the one. My £20,000 cheque is in the post now <g>

Mike

[Trevor Best]

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 07:21:05 +0100 in comp.databases, "Mike MacSween"
<mi************ ******@btintern et.com> wrote:

"TC" <a@b.c.d> wrote in message news:1064117934 .400231@teuthos ...

So - Oracle it is, Mike!

Yup, looks like the one. My £20,000 cheque is in the post now <g>

IIRC you can get a personal/developer edition free (not sure about
Windows anymore by certainly on Linux), then just leave it to your
clients to hand over the big cheques :-)

Out of interest, as an Access developer of many years, would you still
consider Access as a front end or go with something else? (given that
Access can still be bandwidth hungry with linked tables).

--
A)bort, R)etry, I)nfluence with large hammer.

[Mike MacSween]

"Trevor Best" <bouncer@localh ost> wrote in message
news:m1******** *************** *********@4ax.c om...

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 07:21:05 +0100 in comp.databases, "Mike MacSween"
<mi************ ******@btintern et.com> wrote:

"TC" <a@b.c.d> wrote in message news:1064117934 .400231@teuthos ...

So - Oracle it is, Mike!
Yup, looks like the one. My £20,000 cheque is in the post now <g>

IIRC you can get a personal/developer edition free (not sure about
Windows anymore by certainly on Linux), then just leave it to your
clients to hand over the big cheques :-)

It seems to be about £250 as far as I can tell. But yes, there's certainly a
development version that's a lot cheaper than the one a client would need.
Out of interest, as an Access developer of many years, would you still
consider Access as a front end or go with something else? (given that
Access can still be bandwidth hungry with linked tables).

Not too much experience of any other front end to tell the truth. But I
don't see why not. I think Access is a superb RAD tool. And combined with a
true server backend should be good.

Yours, Mike

[Dana]

"Trevor Best" <bouncer@localh ost> wrote in message
news:m1******** *************** *********@4ax.c om...

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 07:21:05 +0100 in comp.databases, "Mike MacSween"
<mi************ ******@btintern et.com> wrote:

"TC" <a@b.c.d> wrote in message news:1064117934 .400231@teuthos ...

So - Oracle it is, Mike!
Yup, looks like the one. My £20,000 cheque is in the post now <g>

IIRC you can get a personal/developer edition free (not sure about
Windows anymore by certainly on Linux), then just leave it to your
clients to hand over the big cheques :-)

Yes the personal edition for windows is still available for free.
Out of interest, as an Access developer of many years, would you still
consider Access as a front end or go with something else? (given that
Access can still be bandwidth hungry with linked tables).

--
A)bort, R)etry, I)nfluence with large hammer.

[TC]

Harald Fuchs <no****@sap.com > wrote in message
news:pu******** ****@srv.protec ting.net...

In article <1064065832.367 431@teuthos>,
"cafe" <a@b.c.d> writes:

An interesting technical characteristic of Oracle, is that it offers the
following four things simultaneously:
o a consistent view of the data returned by each SELECT,
o regardless of how long the SELECT takes to execute,
o even if other processes are comitting updates to the selected records at the same time, and
o without holding any locks!!

This can be important when:
o there is a very high data entry/update load,
o there are concurrent queries for reports etc.,
o it is essential for those reports to present a consistent view of the data at one single point in time, and
o it is not acceptable to achive that using data locks (thereby slowing or suspending other processes).

What's the difference to PostgreSQL (except of the price)?

Sorry, I don't know anything about PostgreSQL.

TC

[Andante.in.Blue]

"Dana" <da************ **@gci.net> wrote in message news:<vm******* *****@corp.supe rnews.com>...

Yes the personal edition for windows is still available for free.

I'm interested in looking into this too. I'm just a student though,
and I'm looking to expand my horizons.

How can one get a hold of this? Are there any recommended resources
to check out to get started? Is it a major departure from Access /
Jet?

[Mike MacSween]

You can download it from the web site. But about 2gb of files! So you need a
high speed connection.

Mike

"Andante.in.Blu e" <05********@sne akemail.com> wrote in message
news:bc******** *************** ***@posting.goo gle.com...

"Dana" <da************ **@gci.net> wrote in message

news:<vm******* *****@corp.supe rnews.com>...

Yes the personal edition for windows is still available for free.

I'm interested in looking into this too. I'm just a student though,
and I'm looking to expand my horizons.

How can one get a hold of this? Are there any recommended resources
to check out to get started? Is it a major departure from Access /
Jet?