I like reading technical whitepapers, and not just related to SQL Server, but anything IT that expands my knowledge and/or view of something I generally find interesting. I was reviewing my blog reader today and noticed the following blog post on the Data Platform Insider Blog:
Thinking Oracle RAC? Think again.
I happen to work in a mixed SQL Server and Oracle environment, and I always get jokes about "When am I going to get into real databases?" and other prods from the Oracle guys. It's all in good humor, but I also am looking for ways to prod back, so I thought I would give this whitepaper a read. So what's my problem?
If you are going to write a "whitepaper" on a subject and "explains some of the common myths and misunderstandings about" a competitors product, you should really make sure that you aren't propagating "myths and misunderstandings about" your own product. This paper is really not much more than Marketing/PR gibberish, it isn't technical at all. While I agree with some parts of what the whitepaper claims, SQL Server is cheaper dollar for dollar to implement than Oracle is, especially with the licensing, I think the coverage of scale out grossly misrepresents how SQL Server "actually" works in the real world, and over states the complexity of an Oracle implementation while over simplifying the SQL Server concepts.
Creating a scalable SQL Server Database Implementation requires no less forethought and preplanning than an Oracle RAC OLTP implementation. Now I am not arguing for Oracle RAC by far here, but at least show both sides of this argument equally. This white paper boils down to being nothing more than a bunch of Marketing crap that isn't a true representation of either product. Don't believe me, read the paper on the link above, and then take a look at the following whitepaper:
Scaling out SQL Server 2005
SQL Server MVP Aaron Bertrand understands the intricacies of creating scalable SQL Server solutions that meet the short and long term needs of high volume applications. He recently blogged about it on the following post:
Being Prepared to Scale
If you really want to have a scalable design, you have to plan for it up front. You aren't going to scale a database designed like AdventureWorks across multiple servers without some significant reworking of your database structures. Identity fields are going to be just one of the problems that have to be addressed for the scale out design.
So what's your thoughts on this? Am I off kilter today, or is this whitepaper a piece of marketing propoganda for Microsoft?