Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!ukc!axion!vision!chris
From: chris@vision.UUCP (Chris Davies)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: Why is Oracle better than Ingres
Message-ID: <1338@vision.UUCP>
Date: 3 Dec 90 16:11:21 GMT
References: <734@keele.keele.ac.uk> <5550@avocado20.UUCP> <1990Dec2.080257.21343@odi.com>
Reply-To: chris@vision.UUCP (Chris Davies)
Organization: VisionWare Ltd., Leeds, UK
Lines: 28

In article <5550@avocado20.UUCP> palat@motcid.UUCP (Mohan Palat) writes:
> Oracle uses an unusual process architecture (in UNIX). Several 
> processes have to be started up before one can even access a 
> database. Ingres does not require any such initialization. 

In version 6.x of both Ingres and Oracle (and Informix/Turbo too) you need 3
or 4 processes running as daemons before you can access any database.  This
situation is not just true for Oracle.  Please check your facts before posting!

In article <1990Dec2.080257.21343@odi.com> dlw@odi.com writes:
> Is this really a practical drawback to Oracle?  That is, can't the
> startup of these processes be arranged to be completely transparent
> and automatic?

Correct.  Unless the system crashes _badly_ you do not need to worry about
these background processes.  IMHO Ingres seems to handle crash recovery
slightly better than Oracle - but that's only a superficial view.

I don't know why these background processes are required - but when
comparing the two versions of Informix (normal and "turbo") the one with
daemons goes like the clappers (relative to the other version).

Chris
-- 
VISIONWARE LTD         | UK: chris@vision.uucp    JANET: chris%vision.uucp@ukc
57 Cardigan Lane       | US: chris@vware.mn.org   BANGNET: ...!ukc!vision!chris
LEEDS LS4 2LE, England | VOICE:  +44 532 788858   FAX:  +44 532 304676
-------------- "VisionWare:   The home of DOS/UNIX/X integration" -------------


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com