3 ms·
I'd say MS SQL is better than not that bad. It's an excellent product. One of Microsoft's best. It's generally comparable to PostgreSQL (also an excellent piece
by GlennS 10y ago
I'd say MS SQL is better than not that bad. It's an excellent product. One of Microsoft's best. It's generally comparable to PostgreSQL (also an excellent piece of software), and has a few advantages over that which may make it worth the extra cost to a business (Management Studio, Reporting Services and clustering).
- gjkood 10y agoI wonder how much it has deviated from its original ancestor, Sybase SQL Server/TransactSQL? Do they still have anything in common?
- gaius 10y agoNo, as of SQL Server either 6.5 or 7, I can't remember which, it was a ground up re-write. You can do cool stuff if you're Windows-native rather than a port from Unix, e.g. http://stackoverflow.com/a/5284537/447514 http://stackoverflow.com/a/5284537/447514
- joshyeager 10y agoI started with SQL Server 7, which was soon after the fork from Sybase. The current versions still have the same syntax and core features. Performance, replication, features, and tools are all vastly improved. But it still feels like the same product.
- adzm 10y agoThe query optimizer takes some of the most insane, convoluted, gargantuan queries and somehow produces relatively good plans. I've messed with a variety of DBMS but I've never encountered one with such a forgiving optimizer. Unfortunately, that is also a downside, since it lets people get away with writing truly maddening T-SQL queries in the first place.