Re: DBAs:Databases 1:10 (Oracle) 1:31 (SQL Server)
- From: "Gene Sais" <Gsais@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <Oracle-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Grant Allen" <gxallen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 09:50:01 -0400
I have to disagree, what SQLserver calls a database is just another
schema in Oracle. It all has to do with definition of what a database
is. MS calls their temp space a database 'tempdb' and 'masterdb' would
be similar to Oracle's Sys schema.
>>> Grant Allen <gxallen@xxxxxxxxx> 06/13/06 9:33 AM >>>
Gene Sais wrote:
> What Oracle calls a database is different from what SQLserver calls a
> database. SQLserver databases are equivalent to Oracle schema's.
Bzzzzt! Wrong (and not just you Gene - sorry to single you out). This
has not been the case for nearly a decade! It makes me laugh every
time
someone states this, especially as I have no love for the M$ product.
SQL Server has *exactly* the same schema support as Oracle *as well as*
support for multiple databases hosted by a given instance. A more
accurate way of thinking of databases in SQL Server is as another
namespace level above schemas.
To keep this vaguely on topic, I wonder if the "number of databases"
count for SQL Server is artificially boosted by the fact that for every
instance a DBA manages, they can claim to be managing 5 or 6 databases
for nothing - master, msdb, tempdb, pubs/northwind/adventureworks.
Ciao
Fuzzy
:-)
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
