How much of a difference does SQL make?

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by JW, Oct 14, 2006.

  1. JW

    JW Guest

    Hi,
    We are running some industry-specific software and are now merging with
    another office. We can get their software upgraded and buy the merge utility
    from the manufacturer to integrate our data for about a thousand dollars.
    They now have an upgraded product they market as being better for running
    multiple locations/shared networks - but when I asked some questions I
    found out the changes were transparent to the user - they were all about
    updating the existing software to a SQL platform to make things more stable
    and minimize the chance of corrupted files. The cost is high because of the
    licensing and will end up being much more than the initial integration (over
    $4000).
    In your opinion, does SQL make that much of a difference. Are there other
    (less expensive) options to consider?

    Thanks for your insights!
     
    JW, Oct 14, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. JW

    Baron Guest

    Have you looked at "Open Source" ?
     
    Baron, Oct 15, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. JW

    Duane Arnold Guest

    Well, if you're wanting to use this software that's using the MS SQL Server
    platform, then you're going to have to use SQL Server. If this software
    company has this solution running on another database platform, then you
    might want to consider that. But if you're going to use this software, then
    it looks like you're going to have to implement SQL Server in the company.
    Software companies do not go around making solutions based on one customer's
    needs or wishes.

    For the reasons you have already stated above, there is no need to take this
    any further with some kind of discussion or insight. And for the reasons
    above is why the software company is running the solution on the SQL server
    platform. You might want to look into a clustered SQL Server mirror solution
    with fail over, if this data is critical to the company.

    If the solution is running on SQL Server, then you shouldn't think that this
    solution is going to work on any other platform or database, because you
    decide that you might get it to work with another database solution. It
    don't work that way. :)

    Duane :)
     
    Duane Arnold, Oct 16, 2006
    #3
  4. JW

    JW Guest

    I guess I should have explained it better. We are already running the
    software - the manufacturer offers an upgrade that comes with the SQL engine
    (my understanding is that our server would not need to be updated) - the
    cost is much higher than the actual software but is recommended especially
    once multiple locations are involved. I was looking for insights/options of
    less expensive ways to maintain good stability (the mfr said SQL protects
    the data and shared networks go down more?)... opinions? Is it worth over
    $4000 to upgrade our existing software to the same software that is SQL
    based? Some seem to think we almost have to to ensure stability... and I'm
    looking for collaboration/insights.

    Thoughts?
    Thanks!
     
    JW, Oct 16, 2006
    #4
  5. JW

    Duane Arnold Guest

    SQL server has many features in the protection of data such as transactional
    mode processing, which ensures that all data is committed in a database
    transaction, either all transactions are committed to all tables if the
    transaction is successful or all data is rolled back if the transaction is
    not successful. In other words, if data has been written to 3 tables in a 4
    table transaction and something happens in writing or updating records on
    the 4th table, the all records in all tables can be rolled back, with the
    tables being put back to their original state with the data. That ensures
    data integrity.

    If there is a SQL server cluster of two SQL Servers with mirroring of data
    of the primary SQL Server with its failover SQL Server, if the primary
    server goes down, then data is not lost because of the mirroring of data
    with the failover server. This ensures data integrity and data is not lost.
    The company can continue processing transactions as the auto failover to the
    failover server will take place. This is particularly important if SQL
    Server is being used in a single network environment or multi/*shared*
    network environment where multiple applications running on a single network
    or multiple networks are trying to read/update/write data using a single
    database solution, such as SQL Server, to ensure data integrity.

    If you want more information, then you should be posting to a database NG.

    Duane :)
     
    Duane Arnold, Oct 16, 2006
    #5
  6. JW

    JW Guest


    Thank you, Duane! It was just the insight I needed.
     
    JW, Oct 16, 2006
    #6
  7. Without knowing the specifics of the application and your organisation
    it's hard to give a definitive answer to your question, but:

    (1) $4000 is not high for a corporate software upgrade;
    (2) SQL is now an industry standard, if your software was running on an
    obsolete database platform (e.g. dBase) then changing to SQL is probably
    a good idea, in terms of security if nothing else;
    (3) There are free versions of SQL (e.g.MySQL) - you could ask whether
    the system can be easily adapted to use that instead of Oracle or
    whatever proprietory SQL database the software firm are using; chances
    are they won't be interested however.

    Hope that helps,

    Julian
     
    Julian Treadwell, Nov 15, 2006
    #7
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.