MS-SQL 2000

[PeF]

If it gets enough votes I'll try to rewrite queries in vBulletin to work with Microsoft SQL 2000. If anyone is interested, feel free to post comments and suggestions.

Oops. Looking at the thread's subject... <ahem> MSSQL 2000 not MySQL 2000. Sorry for that...

I'd write a MS-SQL 2000 database class for it but don't have access to a $20,000 MS-SQL server that I could do it on. :)

I'm not sure what stands in EULA but if it'd be for testing purposes only... I could send it as an attachment. :D
Feel free to contact me, we might find a solution.

Thanks for editing thread's subject.

when I get time (*lol*) Im gonna try and port this to PgSQL ( he says :rolleyes: )

this is a great idea ok its sound sad if you can't effort a sql server but when you have access to it its cool :) its a great idea :)

Originally posted by PeF
I'm not sure what stands in EULA but if it'd be for testing purposes only... I could send it as an attachment. :D
Feel free to contact me, we might find a solution.

Thanks for editing thread's subject.

For development you have to purchase a "Developer's" License which is about $500 dollars and allows 8 concurrent users, I believe.

I have a copy of SQL Server 6.5 and SQL Server 7.0 so the software isn't really a problem as basic syntax hasn't changed in 2000. However to run it properly it needs to be on a server, preferably Win2k. That I don't have.

I have a site license of Win 2K Server / SQL 2000 Enterprise -- not sure how it would work, perhaps I could set up some DB space or something if you were really interested in doing it.

However the LARGEST strength of Postgres, SQL Server, Sybase, Oracle, etc. is that they support MANY more features than MySQL, namely stored procedures, triggers, etc. -- and to REALLY make a port it's not just swapping out the DB class for a new one (that and INSERTS are different, etc. through vendors) -- it's re-writing the queries to take advantage of subqueries, stored procedures, triggers, etc.

The abstraction class in vB is nice, but there are no easy ways to do a 1-for-1 swap of db.php and expect it to work.

i have read your post on Why you don't like mysql...quite complete.....but now for Vbulletin what could be the better and the fastess db we could use do not look the price....event if its 10 000 $....

If money were no object, SQL Server 2000 and Oracle would be the best bets.

Both can support multiple machines in a server farm, tens of thousands of users and much more.

I beg to differ Wayne -- it's been shown that Sybase ASE is both faster and cheaper than Oracle on both large-scale and mainstream (e.g Sun 64-way E10000s, Compaq 4-way ES40's, etc.).

(leaked) Benchmarks have somewhat damaged MS SQL's reputation for speed, some even suggesting that SQL Server 7.0 is FASTER than a comparably equipped SQL 2000 set-up.

so going up with sybase ?
hum....i gone give it a try......but have to get it before ;) and learn it too...

Originally posted by Preacher
i have read your post on Why you don't like mysql...quite complete.....but now for Vbulletin what could be the better and the fastess db we could use do not look the price....event if its 10 000 $....

Bar none it's MySQL for small scale systems. You can't beat the performance if you have relatively few users on it. Of course, the need for a more robust system in the first place is BECAUSE you have heavier demands so we'll assume something larger than what MySQL can handle.

From what I've heard, PostGRES is quite capable at handling loads that MySQL would die at -- AND it supports cool things like stored procedures, triggers, et. al of that junk that I said before. I'd give that a try first because it's free (as in source).

Barring that -- I'd take a look at the commercial DBs out there. When you start getting into the likes of DB2, Oracle, and Sybase you're talking WORLDS more complexity than MySQL or PostGRES. If you're a non-technical person you're most certainly going to need someone (preferably a DBA) to set it up for you and to from time to time look in on it and make sure everything is all good.

Microsoft SQL Server offers much of the fine-tuning that you can get from Oracle / Sybase / DB2 (henceforth known as 'the big boys' ;)) but it shields you from that complexity via a nice windows interface. Because of this, it's MUCH easier to configure / maintain for a non-DBA (scheduling backups, query tuning, etc. is a breeze!). Unfortunately, the performance of SQL server is, as you might expect, much less than the big boys. Oracle claims that they can take your application running on SQL Server and give you a 2 or 3 x performance increase from switching to Oracle. If not they'll pay you $1,000,000! (or maybe it's 2 now, not sure).

So really the determining factor can't be pinpointed to just one aspect of RDBMS design -- you have to evaluate your situation, your hardware, scalibility, integration to other packages, etc.

That said -- GO SYBASE! ;) :D

P.S. one of my threads talks about where to get Sybase -- ASE 11.0.0.3 is 100% free for any use that you want. ASE 11.9.2 is free for preproduction use and testing only, if you want to use it in production then you gotta pony up the bucks.

(This isn't actually directed at Matt as he obviously knows what I'm going to say. It's more for beginning PHP developers)

Originally posted by mrogish
The abstraction class in vB is nice, but there are no easy ways to do a 1-for-1 swap of db.php and expect it to work. Despite this, it doesn't mean you shouldn't use an abstraction class. vB's class handles multiple types of connections, with and without passwords. Automatic error handling on every query and emails you with the error. And automatic memory management (when calling query_first).

Trying to do that without using a function would probably double your code size. And you know how much duplicate code you'd have, right? :)

Originally posted by Ed Sullivan
Despite this, it doesn't mean you shouldn't use an abstraction class. vB's class handles multiple types of connections, with and without passwords. Automatic error handling on every query and emails you with the error. And automatic memory management (when calling query_first).

Trying to do that without using a function would probably double your code size. And you know how much duplicate code you'd have, right? :)

Of course! I use a DB class for my apps as well -- it's recommended by most design sites that I have seen on the web for Mike's reasons (and more!) -- so beginning programmers listen up -- Mike speaketh the truth! Listen to his sage advice!

From a portability standpoint, however, it does you no good because you end up re-writing each query anyway.

However, if the world was a perfect place and everyone was ANSI compliant it WOULD be a great solution to the portability problem. Just include a different db.php and voila -- instant port to a different RDBMS!! :D

MS Access owns j00 all!

I thought the thread could use a little humor!

Originally posted by PFunk
MS Access owns j00 all!

I thought the thread could use a little humor!

LOL. Access does indeed 0wn us all! ;)

I would wery muct like to use a MS SQL version..

Organizer

Originally posted by mrogish
I beg to differ Wayne -- it's been shown that Sybase ASE is both faster and cheaper than Oracle on both large-scale and mainstream (e.g Sun 64-way E10000s, Compaq 4-way ES40's, etc.).


I have only worked with MS-SQL Server 6.5 extensively.

Also Our application performs better, more robustly and with fewer resources (average load on the Server - 0.1 with 1000 users) under Oracle 8.1.6 than it did under Sybase ASE 11.5 (average load - 48.0) on similar hardware.

Originally posted by wluke
I have only worked with MS-SQL Server 6.5 extensively.

Also Our application performs better, more robustly and with fewer resources (average load on the Server - 0.1 with 1000 users) under Oracle 8.1.6 than it did under Sybase ASE 11.5 (average load - 48.0) on similar hardware.

SQL 6.5 was kind of a bad build, almost like Sybase system 10.

What kind of an application do / did you run on ASE 11.5? Those loads are pretty crazy and *something* would have to be wrong. I'm not sure how 11.5 was configured but it seems pretty abnormal.

We've seen some pretty dramatic cache hits (150,000 or more a second) on Sybase ASE 11.9.2 on the Intel platform -- we've committed the move to Solaris and ASE 12.0, I can't wait till the servers arrive!! :)

But to make SQL Server 7/2000 you'd need a significant amount of cash to get the licences (NT/2000 Server as well) -- check out ASE 11.0.0.3 -- 100% free for any use!

We run an Alarm Monitoring System and Customer Relations Application containing over 45 gigabytes of data across 5 million records in 800 tables.

It keeps track of every alarm for the second largest security company in the United States and supports 1,000 concurrent users.

Both Systems run on IBM RS-6000 Servers using AIX 4.3 or AIX 4.4.

The only differences between the two systems are:
1. Sybase runs on a 24 processor F50 and Oracle runs on a 24 processor S80.

2. I worked on the Oracle System and the Sybase system was screwed up when I started.

3. The Oracle system doesn't have to be rebooted every 30 days due to a row-locking bug in Sybase 11.5 that causes it to refuse connections if the error log gets above XX bytes.