Re: SQL Server 2000 versus Pervasive.SQL
From: Scott Morris (bogus_at_bogus.com)
Date: 04/29/04
- Next message: Jacco Schalkwijk: "Re: failed backup"
- Previous message: Jimmay: "sql query string to find duplicate data with a table/column"
- In reply to: David: "SQL Server 2000 versus Pervasive.SQL"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2004 11:09:24 -0400
It all comes down to costs vs benefits. It may well be that Pervasive (and
the ERP system using it) is entirely adequate for the needs of your
organization. Apparently you perceive SQL Server to be superior in your
mind - why is that? It may be technologically superior - but does that
alone justify your position? Sometimes a minivan is just as good as an
armored personnel carrier at much lower cost. If your solution is better,
than a proper cost/benefit analysis will support it. Usually, the decision
turns on dollars - convince your mgmt that your proposal is cheaper over the
lifespan of the system (probably 3-5 years) and you should have no problems.
You may also win them over by showing that your system, though not cheaper,
has advantages (perhaps not easily quantified) over the other - things like
flexibility, industry or vendor support, expandability, etc. Beware of
making decisions based on vendor promises or statements of direction!
Similar questions have been asked in the past - a search of the NG archives
might be useful.
Side note - I have used btrieve in the past and found it very reliable and
fast when used with a well design application that is aware of its
limitations. I would certainly hesitate to use it for a ERP system but that
doesn't mean it can't be done. The business world ran just fine on high-end
ISAM databases prior to commercially available and competitive RDBMS
technology.
Last side note - The underlying technology does not guarantee a "good"
system. If you read the newsgroups over time, you will see that there are
people who create systems on SQL Server using poorly design databases and
poorly written code. Does this mean that SQL Server is worse than Sybase
(or Oracle or ... )?
"David" <db_1984@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:E45BA1E4-1CFB-4872-A3B8-FD16C1C29F52@microsoft.com...
> I need some help trying to advise the managers at my company that SQL 2000
is superior to Pervasive.SQL. We are a manufacturing company looking at
replacing our ERP system. The managers prefer the ERP system with
Pervasive.SQL and I told them they are making a big mistake. I gave them
some technical details about why we need an ERP system with SQL 2000, but I
need more information and comparisons. Are there any web sites that have
done comparison tests with SQL 2000 versus Pervasive.SQL? Any other thughts
and ideas would be helpful.
>
> Send resposnes to db_1984@yahoo.com
>
> Thanks
> David
> MCSE, MCSA, CCNA, CCDA, CCA
- Next message: Jacco Schalkwijk: "Re: failed backup"
- Previous message: Jimmay: "sql query string to find duplicate data with a table/column"
- In reply to: David: "SQL Server 2000 versus Pervasive.SQL"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
