>Right and every one is busy porting their SQL databases to HANA. Oh, wait. They are not.
Indeed, they are not, guess why ? Why would you not switch to an in-memory database ? Why would you not switch to an in-memory database that uses the same language (TSQL) as your current database ? because you are an idiot! You already are if you run MS SQL Server, so that was easy.
You know, even Postgres and mysql^H^H^H^H^HMariaDb beat SQL server ... and run on an OS that costs a fraction of Windows Server - as we have already demonstrated ad nauseam ...
>Just LOL. Sybase is a dying dinosaur. No one uses it for green field sites these days.
I think quite a "few" SAP customers and finance shops tend to disagree ... ;-)
>Only if they need RAC server (and can afford the $100K per socket!).
Come on, under heavy load Oracle beats a tuned SQL server easily, even untuned on identical hardware. It is unfair, cause Oracle runs on Linux, but so is life! Of course, RAC vs MS SQL server? Not the same league, man ... SQL server replication ? LOL, even Sybase replication server hands that the empty glass of water after the finish line....
DISCLAIMER: No, I do not work for and have never worked for Sybase/SAP/Oracle ... I just happen to be very familiar with a piece of software that runs on a variety of db's, including the above as well as DB2 and a few others ... I see the heavy load stats every morning ...