Slashdot Mirror
Alternatives to MS SQL Server for Dynamic Content Website?
Cindy asks: "My current employer has a handful of websites, which are massive and messy entanglement of ASP on IIS with MS SQL storing the dynamic content. As the company scaled down to only 1 full-time temp (me) in IS and a sales manager overseeing servers + managing web sites, the company would like to trim down behind the back. More specifically, they would like to let go of the use of SQL server altogether. I've used Zope before, but I'm not sure how well it works on Windows. Then there's ColdFusion, but I don't know anything about it. What other choices do I have?"
"The replacement has the following requirements:
- Must run on Windows (they're a Microsoft reseller after all)
- Stable, mature, secure for corporate strength (over 10 product categories, each with 8-10 products)
- Easy to learn, easy to use, and easy to maintain for someone who is comfortable with server maintenance and website design, but not too knowledgeable. I'll leave the company by January
- Not too much programming involved. HTML and ASP/PHP-ish are OK."
1. How much do you need to change the current set-up?
As one full-time temp, do you really have the personpower to re-write or re-implement everything, probably temporarily breaking things in the meanwhile? You'll be a wreck.
Why not leave it?
2. Licensing.
Tell us about how much you're paying for the different licensing of the MS server components you use. Maybe a libre solution might make more sense? Could you argue that in exchange for cutting out the licensing costs, you be given a few other temp team members to work with?
I think we really need more information before we can tell you what's best for your particular circumstances.
One more thing: Cold Fusion is soooo 90's.
And based on the content of this ask slashdot, it's you.
You compare Zope to SQL Server. Zope is an applications server. SQL Server is an RDBMS, a relational database. You can't replace SQL Server with Zope. Zope can use SQL Server. Since you've already licensed the expensive (and, in my opinion, EXCELLENT) SQL Server, why not continue to use it? If you want to use Zope instead of ASP, go ahead, but what makes you think it's going to be any easier to maintain than what you've got now? Or rather, will the headache of converting to Zope (or whatever) be worth the end result? Could it be that your current setup is "a messy entanglement" because of the way it was written, and not due to the tools you are using?
Perhaps you should hire a consultant to look over what you've got and help you figure out the best solution. It's hard to make a good recommendation when we don't know WHY your current situation is so entangled, or how hard it's going to be to untangle it.
"And like that
Ten product categories, each with 8-10 products?
What you don't say is whether you are supporting online sales of the products, or if this is just a brochure site.
If it's just the latter, all you need is some static html and a little templating. Certainly no database. I also don't understand why you want to change from asp. It's certainly more than adaquate for this job.
No, this is the perfect opportunity for subversion. Your rudeness to the question is completely unwarented. The open source community is going to have to find ways to force it's way onto the beachheads patrolled by such pointy haired MS lovers. This is a perfect case study of the real world obstacles that will be encountered.
If you think that you can just turn your back whenever a "goofy restriction" is in place, you are dooming the world to MS dominance.
to help a company that funds a company that is actively hostile to the members of this community.
What community is that? I'm a Slashdot reader, and I use Microsoft products all the time.
Not everyone on here is an anti-Microsoft zealot. (I'd wager the majority reading this site are accessing it from a Windows computer.)
"And like that
(Based on the fact that I've been in this position before and chose the wrong path, I offer this advice.)
First, given the lack of IT resources, you should be extremely wary of switching to a new technology (such as Zope). When you leave in January, there's no guarantee that anyone will understand Zope and it's likely that it won't be stable (or scalable). You may leave the company in a worse position than it is now.
Instead, I would offer two alternatives that could leave you in a more stable position:
Hope this helps.
-Peter
i don't mean to be rude but you've chosen to work at what i'd consider to be an unethical company.
How do you know what company she works for? She doesn't say in her submission. Do you know this submitter?
For sake of argument, let's just assume you don't. For sake of argument, let's just assume that you keyed in on the words "Microsoft reseller" and let fly with the spit and invective. Let's just assume that, shall we?
You ignorant, arrogant bastard. How dare you jump to conclusions about this poor person's company based solely on two words in an "Ask Slashdot?" You wanna talk about "actively hostile?" How's this for "actively hostile?" You, Kevin, give the community of computer hobbyists and open source advocates a bad name, and that's saying something. People wonder why Linux and open-source software in general are having trouble gaining acceptance in the market. This post of yours is an excellent example of why this is so. For every generous and helpful soul out there in the community, there's some arrogant little shit like you telling people to "go fuck off" when they ask for help.
Bite me, Kevin Lyda.
Oh, one more thing. You're not e.e. cummings, you know. Learn to use a fucking shift key. Asshole.
Whew. That felt good. Some people just needs flamin', you know?
I write in my journal
I'll tell you what I told Kevin-- only without using so much profanity, because this kind of response from you seems out of character with your usual posts; I'm extending the benefit of the doubt here and assuming that you happened to be an asshole in this instance, but that you're not usually an asshole.
This kind of attitude and a stance of open-source advocacy are incompatible. When using, or even thinking of using, open-source software, one has nowhere to turn but to the community itself for advice and help. When someone does that, it's critically important that the members of the community not be assholes. This kind of behavior just shatters whatever tiny grains of credibility the community of hobbyists and hackers has managed to accumulate over the years.
In other words, take your mama's advice. If you can't say something nice, shut the fuck up.
I write in my journal
i think if you search on my name, you'll find that i offer a great deal of help. in fact just this week a person sent me mail thanking me for an answer i found and posted regarding laptops nearly three years ago.
the fact is that microsoft is actively trying to destroy linux and free software. they don't believe in competition, they believe in monopoly. they believe in putting free software developers and admins out of work. and they use a slew of tactics to do that.
i do think people should have choice. i have nothing against other closed source software publishers like oracle, sun, compaq or apple. but then that's because they are not actively targeting my hobby, my livelihood and the hobbies/livelihoods of my friends. they do compete, but not in an agressive and frequently unethical manner.
so, yes, i'm annoyed by people that support such an organisation. and i'm utterly disgusted by people that support such organisations and have the utter gall to then come to communities which have a large number of free software users with a question about how to spooge off our work.
so rant all you want, that's my perception and i'm sticking to it. i'm more then willing to help people who are not blatently unethical.
US Citizen living abroad? Register to vote!
If you don't want to help, shut up. Seriously, nobody asked you what your opinion is of Microsoft or companies (of which there are literally thousands) that sell Microsoft software, or what you think of people that work for those companies. I really, really mean this from the bottom of my heart: shut up.
I reiterate my original two points. One: you are an arrogant, judgmental prick who does more harm to the reputation of the community through this attitude than a whole truckloads of Microsofts could ever do. And two: you really, really need to learn how to use the shift key.
I write in my journal
Adaptive Server Anywhere, by Sybase, fits all of your requirements. It:
1) Is fast and very inexpensive compared to the other professional alternatives.
2) Is mature (been around 15+ years)
3) Is scalable from a DB size of 80k (seriously, it runs on RIM pagers) up to many gigabytes. It's used by places like McDonald's (their cash registers run it), the city of Edmonton (their hydro personnel run it on their PDAs when out in the field), etc.
4) Is available on oodles of platforms (Microsoft, Linux, *nix, etc.)
5) Requires *very* little maintenance or DB administration. If you're used to SQL Server, you will probably be amazed to see how easy it is to run/administer ASA.
6) Is self-tuning -- it has dynamic cache resizing, like MS SQL Server, as well as a great query optimizer with histogram-based selectivity and a fast join enumeration engine. It supports full ANSI SQL92 and a big chunk of ANSI SQL99, as well as T-SQL (like SQL Server).
7) Is supported by a well-built-up community of users, developers, and Sybase staff who regularly answer questions on the newsgroups, helping new users, helping others tweak their SQL, etc.
8) Has ODBC, TDS (like MS SQL Server), and ANSI/ISO ESQL/C interfaces.
But, don't take my word for it. Check out news://forums.sybase.com (the "sqlanywhere" newsgroups), and ask around. Check out www.sybase.com and download a free evaluation copy and see if it suits your needs.
Personally, at about $400 Canadian, I think that ASA is about the fastest, easiest, most capable DB server around for small to medium-sized DBs.
That's three. How many flames of the submitter are we going to see in this article? I was surprised at the first one, and disappointed by the second. Reading this, I'm starting to think that maybe there's a seedy underbelly to "the community" after all. Between you and that Kevin guy who complained about people trying to "spooge off of our work" (that cracked me up), I'm really beginning to understand why open source has the reputation it does in so many circles.
Probably the best thing for "the community" in this instance is for all y'all Microsoft-haters to learn when to keep your pie holes shut and just play nice with the other kids.
I write in my journal
i have nothing against other closed source software publishers like oracle, sun, compaq or apple. but then that's because they are not actively targeting my hobby, my livelihood and the hobbies/livelihoods of my friends. they do compete, but not in an agressive and frequently unethical manner
Yeah right. Oracle, Sun, Compaq, IBM and Apple would attack you in a heartbeat if they thought it would improve their bottom line.
It wasn't that long ago when Apple and IBM were the competition-crushing-FUDing-"It will only run on Apple Hardware" behemoth, and Microsoft was the rebeleous start up.
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
PHB: "Maybe there's something to this open-source thing - but what about support?"
LinuxFan: "Well, you get support from the community. Take a look at this 'ask slahsdot' for example, where a reseller asks a question about SQL."
PHB: "People are telling her to fuck off because she's evil!"
LinuxFan: "Er... well... maybe, but Microsoft would tell you to fuck off and charge you $100..."
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
Not everyone on here is an anti-Microsoft zealot. (I'd wager the majority reading this site are accessing it from a Windows computer.)
Too true! I've come to the conclusion that there is no moral high ground to be had anymore in IT. It seems like every technology camp is intent on demeaning everyone else because they believe themselves to be superior. It's just another form of primitive tribalism where each tribe attempts to propagate itself through the zealotry of its constituency. The relative merits of each style of development and technology philosophy become lost and almost irrelevant in the cacophony of arrogance. It's getting very old...
The bottom line is that I'm going to implement the best tool for the job for a customer using whatever vendor makes the most sense. When a given vendor becomes too much of a pain in the ass, I'll move on to the next, and so on.
My viewpoint leads me to believe that Microsoft, OSS, IBM, and a few others will be around a long time to come. Some other vendors (Sun, Apple, etc) will be too much of a pain to bother with, and they will remain in their respective niche corners. Some of them may die entirely (possibly Sun, among others), and some may even transcend niche status (possibly Apple, among others). We'll see.
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!