Now, from what I know, large databases (that most of us do not work on, such as Financal Systems or Major ERP systems) Oracle is more efficient.

We are working on a Healthcare software/service startup and our choice was clearly SQL Server. Because it was cheaper, more compatible (I think) to web applications and certainly a lot cheaper to support on the long run.

Have a great day
Suresh

p.s. Pinal, you are da man. I absolutely love your blogs. Very informative. Cheers mate!

I suppose my favorite database is SQl Server since i have been using it long time and i find it user friendly and easy to learn.Also it has its own Analysis services, Reporting services.

But when it comes to performance consideration, it is very slow when compared to other databases like Oracle,DB2 etc.
It is not suitable for very large application.

Also i find that its far behind in terms of features when compared to Oracle. All the new features of latest version have Sql server (2008) was present long back in earlier version of Oracle. I find Sql copying the features of Oracle in this case to be more competitive.

finally i can say,

coding & user interface wise favorite database is Sql server

Based on Performance,favorite database is Oracle

I have read many articles about Relational Databases on your blog they are very useful. All comarison like cost, Sequrity and other feauture SQL SERVER is good.

I have been using sql server for last 3 years. I found it very useful and interesting to use. I voted for sql server as i have worked in sql and one of the most widely used and popular rdbms.

Thanks

Anil kumar dubey

I will go for Oracle, since I have worked on oracle and few stuff which I think SQL server is not providing campare to Oracle is

Platform dependancy

SQL Server is only operable on the Windows platform, a major limitation for it to be an enterprise solution. Oracle is available on multiple platforms such as Windows, all flavors of Unix from vendors such as IBM, Sun, Digital, HP, Sequent, etc. and VAX-VMS, as well as MVS. The multi-platform nature of Oracle makes it a true enterprise solution.

Locking and concurrency

SQL Server has no multi-version consistency model, which means that “writers block readers and readers block writers” to ensure data integrity. In contrast, with Oracle, the rule is “readers don’t block writers and writers don’t block readers.” This is possible without compromising data integrity because Oracle will dynamically re-create a read-consistent image for a reader of any requested data that has been changed but not yet committed.

i started database with oracle. but look and fell , comfortable, various features, navigation components in SQL Server make to sense to think. so i shifted and using SQL Server commonly for all my applications to develop.

Finally my vote to SQL Server.

SSIS AND SSAS are two rich sets of tools which enable the SQL Server Database to be a complete Datawarehouse Solution. They integrate with SQL Server very well enabling us to Deploy high end Datawarehousing solutions.

Thank you

By all means SQL Server is my choice. Even though Oracle is roboust and lot of features, comparing the price, ease of use ….. SQL is the Best

Starting from SQL Server 6.5 till now, i feel SQL Server had come a long way and it may catch up with Oracle if future on all the functionality.

So my Preference is SQL Server

I’ve use a few RDBMs, but for short periods, like a year or two. I have very particular tastes, and as such am heavily biased, so IMNSHO:

SQL Server implements what programmers want, and then bends to the way things should be where it doesn’t add too much inconvenience.

Pros: Integrated, easy to manage, secure, supported, low cost, convenient in most cases, Pinal Dave
Cons: inconvenient in some cases (SET NOCOUNT ON et al, non-ANSI join-syntax is deprecated, and others) bar set too low for DBAs (allowing much idiocy), no robust command line tool

Oracle implements things the way they should be done, and then bends to the programmer where it is helpful but does not break any ideas.

Pros: Robust, secure, supported, fast, long history
Cons: Very expensive, inconvenient in some cases

MySQL isn’t a database. It’s free and fast for lightweight applications, but lacks security and robustness of a real database. I’d use it where speed and cost are factors, but not security or data retention.

Pros: Fast, free
Cons: Not secure, error messages rarely help, not robust, no reliable data retention, slow on complex queries with large data sets.

Others include:

DB2 implements whatever it can, trying to make everybody happy, supporting the popular features of both SQL Server and Oracle. I would use it where being an IBM shop made sense. Otherwise, SQL Server or Oracle could easily do the same job.

Pros: Supports everything. Cheap. Supported by IBM.
Cons: Easy to crash (i crashed it, that is the server, 4 different times by running regular queries), lack of distinctness

PostgreSQL is similar to Oracle, but free. I’d use it anywhere other people would use MySQL but want a database instead, or where commercial support is a must.

Pros: Fast, free, secure
Cons: Relatively small community supporting it

Access is a RAD for small applications.

Pros: Cheap, integrated, RAD
Cons: Single user, not for large applications.

One word:

SQL Server – Easy
Oracle – Robust
MySQL – Fake
DB2 – Contender
PostgreSQL – Free
Access – Small

Thank you for reading. I think i got it out of my system now. :)

1.When I joined Parliament House as AdHoc Programmer , i was assigned to take backup and restore critical database to production server April 2007, Sql Server 7.0 and Sql Server 2000

2.Next, I was asked to run an DTS package , which will copy a table to another database (different server – only 5 days before Parliament Session Starts)

3.Server Goes Down , Retored the Data Folder from backups.

4.Sql Server 2005 was Brought – March 2008

5. Ported All Database from SQL SERVER 2000 to 2005

6. Corrected some Queries of old Applications which works on SQL SERVER 7.0

7.Started to read this blog

8. Retreated the basic of DBMS , Read SQL SERVER 2005 Administration book , attend 2 day work shop in MICROSOFT , Nehru place , Delhi

9.I dont know what should i call my self ” Database Developer or Database Administrator”

10. Still Confused but i know SQL SERVER 2005 is better than the best .

In terms of the low end of the spectrum, SQLite is the way to go! Pure free awesome quicky prototyping magic!

SQL Server is great if using the MS tool chain and MS OSes.

PostgreSQL for robust performance at very low cost, multiple platforms.

Oracle if you need solid clustering or advanced features such as data versioning, etc. And of course you have lots of money. Many of the features in Oracle can’t be found elsewhere. It is also dizzingly fast.

Pound for pound, SQLite is the most impressive. It is useful for hobbyists and prototyping. It also powers Google Gears and numerous other well known apps.

I still think c-Tree is the best database in the universe, although the downside is the limited acceptance and limited developer resources.

For the past few years, all my clients have used SQL Server.

Like all things Microsoft, SQL Server is a “good-enough” solution, so using and implementing it is tolerable. Since it plays well with MS office and MS builds all its business-centric products around it, it becomes the de-facto standard.

Compromise is not always the best course, but when dealing with jumpy executives and poorly-trained IT, sometimes the best you can do is compromise.

Even for some of the grandest projects, Oracle has usually been overkill. It’s expensive, a hog, slow (in my experience — and don’t blame me, it was always administered by a “professional” Oracle admin), but will handle 500,000 transactions in a gulp. I have seen one implementation of an Oracle database that actually needed that kind of horsepower.

Sybase and MySQL need no comments. Their fanbois are poised out there, ready to tout their superiority and flame anyone who disagrees.

Like one of your commenters stated, the question should be “what’s your favorite database for X type of project?”

If the environment is Microsoft and the platform is business and the clients and staff are untrained and largely uninformed, the answer is always SQL Server.

Still, I would never undertake a project using SQL Server without one of the best ORM/EF products available. Microsoft’s LINQ and EF are both less palatable as database access layers than are the visual components that come in Visual Studio tolerable as win or web-form components. (While most of what MS delivers is “good enough,” I think MS delivered LINQ and EF so they could claim they provide something. As they dissatisfied girlfriend says of the gift from an unwanted suitor, “you shouldn’t have.”

Just as I would never deliver a product using the world’s ugliest visual components (the VS toolbox), I would never use SQL Server without a quality (and pricey) ORM.

Even with all it’s drawbacks, sometimes the answer is SQL Server even if the staff and clients are very skilled and knowledgeable. I can think of some cases where it is the best answer, but the meta-requirements have to go far beyond capacity, speed, platform, or tools.

I guess there will always be a few “BetaMax” databases out there that are far superior in performance and capability to SQL Server. But the Redmond Marketing Horde has long conquered the battleground and there is little hope of the best rising above the most popular.

1. SQL Server is eazy to use, program and understand. Its more user/programmer friendly than Oracle.

2. Oracle on any day performs better than SQL Server in terms of volume of data it can store and fetching data and performance. Oracle beats SQL Server in terms of how much data it can cater.

So Oracle is the way to go to for corporates whose data will be ever increasing. SQL Server is something programmers can use to learn querying and query tuning.