"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:491c70f1$1@news.povray.org...
> Gail wrote:
>
>> Personally I consider any database under 100GB small. Over about 700 GB 
>> is large. Huge is over a couple TB.
>
> Well, I guess Oracle is *designed* for big stuff.

So's SQL Server.

> So I guess to all you guys, the 1.2 GB database I'm responsible is 
> "microscopic" then? :-)

Tiny. I have test databases on my desktop ten times that.

The smaller they are the easier they typically are to maintain and admin. 
It's the bigger ones that are difficult because of the time required to do 
anything with them (like backup, restore, defragment, etc)

Post a reply to this message