Archives of the TeradataForum
Message Posted: Sat, 02 Nov 2002 @ 16:55:38 GMT
I have been doing some comparison between SQL Server and Teradata recently and I was analyzing the execution times between SQL Server and Teradata.
I ran a query (frequently used by our customers) against a database replicated in Teradata and SQL Server (the indexes match in both the database servers).
I simulated the query 1000 times. The average time taken by the query for one thread/session is 3.5 seconds in Teradata. In SQL Server for the first run, it took 9 seconds, but for the next 1000 runs the average was 1134 milliseconds (for one thread). When i increased the concurrent threads/sessions to 5, the average time in Teradata was 13 seconds and for SQL Server it was 4 seconds.
We have a 2 node Teradata installation in our organization and the sql server was run on a compaq DL380 server. I am surprised by the better results in SQL Server. Is procedural caching supported by SQL Server making the difference. Does Teradata not support anything similar to procedural caching?
|Copyright 2016 - All Rights Reserved|
|Last Modified: 27 Dec 2016|