Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!munnari.oz.au!metro!cs.uow.edu.au!ph
From: ph@cs.uow.edu.au (Rev Phil Herring, DD (Ret.))
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: Why is Oracle better than Ingres
Message-ID: <1990Dec4.222441.16160@cs.uow.edu.au>
Date: 4 Dec 90 22:24:41 GMT
References: <734@keele.keele.ac.uk> <5550@avocado20.UUCP> <1990Dec2.080257.21343@odi.com> <1338@vision.UUCP> <76172@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> <SWFC.90Dec4111746@mendelssohn.cs.columbia.edu>
Reply-To: ph@wyvern.cs.uow.edu.au (Rev Phil Herring, DD (Ret.))
Organization: The University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia
Lines: 24

In article <SWFC.90Dec4111746@mendelssohn.cs.columbia.edu> 
  swfc@cs.columbia.edu writes:
>
>The original question: Why is Oracle better than Ingres?
>
>After reading all the follow-ups, I have reached this conclusion:
>
>Oracle is not better than Ingres.

Maybe, maybe not... I've benchmarked ORACLE and Ingres for a slightly
odd application (a realtime control system with *very* high insertion
rates), and ORACLE was over ten times faster than Ingres in that case.
(In fact, only ORACLE could handle the high insertion rate with full
DBMS fucntionality - the only other product that came close was Sybase,
and it required an unlogged "bulk copy" operation to manage that. This
causes me to believe that ORACLE is actually kinda quick for an RDBMS.)

This is, of course, just one way in which one is "better" than the 
other. If you count reliability, customer support, development and
CASE tools, etc, you will get a totally different picture.



-- Phil.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com