[thelist] MySQL vs MS SQL

Hershel Robinson hershelr at netvision.net.il
Wed Feb 18 14:45:25 CST 2004


> : MS SQL has support for transactions, built in load balancing
> : solutions in the enterprise product line, and a number of
> : advanced features which might make scaling
> : the business a lot easier.  ODBC overhead can become a
> : factor in high traffic environments.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> This is where I agree totally with Jonathon. SQL Server (and
> DB2, Oracle
> etc) are true enterprise RDBMSes, and provide the feature set
> that will (a)
> keep your DB Server up and running (provided you have a
> competant DBA) and
> (b) scale to anything you throw at it.

The client says that $5K for a single processor license is doable if I feel
it is the right way to go. That's the price for Standard Edition. He says
$20K for Enterprise is beyond the budget at this point.

Can I ask if anyone can confirm that Standard Edition SQL Server 2K will
indeed outperform MySQL? And to what degree?

> I understand that you application is built using Perl, and if
> you do use
> ODBC to connect, then it can become a bit chatty as ODBC is
> COM-based. If
> you migrate your application to .Net, then you can take
> advantage of the
> native providers in .Net which are much more perfomant (there
> are providers
> for a few different DBMSes available).

There are methods aside from ODBC to connect from Perl to SQL Server. Can
you explain (or anyone) what it means that because ODBC is COM-based it can
become a bit 'chatty?'

Thanks,
Hershel



More information about the thelist mailing list