473,903 Members | 4,199 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

db2 vs oracle

No flame wars, please!

We're planning a move from a non-relational system to
a relational system. Our choices have been narrowed to
Oracle and DB2. Since we're moving from non-relational
to relational, then we're not currently using any
relational-type operators. So I expect the end result to
use simple, SQL standard commands and queries.

The question: At the SQL standard level is there any
appreciable difference between Oracle and DB2.

Example: I know that Oracle has cascading deletes. We're
not using them now so I don't expect to use them with the
new system.

Thanks.

Mike
Nov 12 '05
43 4777
Data Goob wrote:
Interesting viewpoints about Oracle vs IBM.

I recently scanned through the autobiography about Larry Ellison called
"SOFTWAR", at my local bookstore. Very interesting book, and full of a
lot of interesting information, and lots of innaccuracies. The telling
point at least to me was about Larry and what the company is all about.
( You can find it in the business book section under "arrogance" 8-)
So your comments are based on a brief scan of a 500 page book in a
bookstore, written by a journalist about a single person, and on that
you determine the usefulness of the technology produced by over 40,000
other people ? Great analysis.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=goob&r=f

In the book they mention that Oracle is more about applications than the
database. If you have an application that requires Oracle, you will indeed
have to use Oracle. But I would caution against using Oracle as a database
choice especially in light of where your people are in skills. In Larry's
own words they indicate the direction of the company has less to do with
being a database company and more to do with applications.
Complete and utter bullshit. You have absolutely NO basis for your
characterizatio n, yet you make it. Why ?
Larry is in
his own words more interesting in winning than providing a product that
is indicative of being a good technology choice. Certainly the grid is
interesting, but it is not necessarily clustering, nor is it really even
applicable to a lot of business requirements.
You obviously have no idea how the grid applies to business. Note that
one of the foremost proponents of the grid architecture is indeed Ford.
Oracle will be a big nut
to crack in an organization that has never used a relational database.
2 days is all it takes - see
http://download-west.oracle.com/docs...b10742/toc.htm
Scan it online.

IBM has an excellent set of databases, and the company can also sell you
a complete end-to-end solution, meaning hardware as well as software.
They cannot actually sell you any business applications, can they. A
complete end-to-end as long as you take the actual business out of the
definition of the solution (you know, HR, General Ledger, Mnaufacturing,
Supply Chain etc). You are a silly person.
I
have seen the latest results on benchmarks and both Oracle and DB2 are
at the top. IBM will dominate the landscape with Power5 hardware, and
Power6, etc. with loads of innovation that I do not see coming from
any other vendor.
Correct - IBM hardware is very,very good. Both Oracle and DB2 run very
well on it.

However, hardware innovation does not = software innovation.

DB2 is NOT particulary innovative software, and indeed, a large part of
the DB2 software devleopment plans are to provide features from other
databases to aid in migration from SQL Server and Oracle - witness the
addition of both indentities and sequences in the last couple of
releases. The latest release of DB2 is a prime example of this - there
is very little that is actually innovative (or even new) in the 8.2
release.

It is indeed important to make the choice in the right context as others
have indicated. Should it really be Oracle vs DB2 as a database choice?
Or in your case DB2 vs SQL-Server or Ingres or MySQL or Informix? These
are database products that would probably be more suited to a comparison
today. Incidentally Oracle has not had a major architectural change in
its engine since V7, and that was what, 10+ yrs ago? SQL-Server hasn't
had a major upgrade in what 6 yrs? DB2 has been changing rapidly to meet
the market, and so are a few of the others.
You are confusing two things. All databases meet new market
requirements, some faster than others, and none of them should require
major architectural changes to do so. If a database company has required
a major architectural change in the last 10 years to meet new market
requirements then that is an indication that they have screwed up big
time in their planning. The only DB that I'm aware of that did a
complete rewrite in the last 10-20 years was Informix with the advent of
SMP technology, and look what hapopened to them.

I hope you are not implying that DB2 has had a major architectural
change in the last 10 years as it simply hasn't (indeed it's still based
on techniques pioneered over 40 years ago, such as shared nothing, read
locks, aries etc).
Go with the latest not the
late.
Go with the proven not the unproved. Leading edge not bleeding edge. You
are a silly person.
Interesting too that DB2 is morphing very rapidly, responding to
what customers want. This should be a big checkbox no matter what your
choice. You won't need the grid unless you're part of the SETI project.
By all means please continue to avoid the grid. Do so with a fervour,
and by all means base your technical analysis of products based on a
scan of a book in a book store, and your own personal feelings about a
single person.

Not for you is any interest in low cost computing, or the practical
application of the principles of consolidation, commoditization ,
standardization and automation to Information Technology.

The grid absolutely does not and should not have a place in your future.

BTW, Darwin was absolutely correct.You might want to scan "The Origin of
Species" the next time you are in a book store.

Daniel Morgan wrote:
You're using a wrong approach to determine the RDBMS that will suit
your need. The kind of application you're thinking of running should
be the first concern. Are you goning to be running OLTP, DDS or
datawarehouse application. I don't think Oracle will bet UDB, Sybase
or SQL Server when it comes to OLTP application. As far as
datawarehouse is concern, Sybase has a specific product that is design
for that specific application called Sybase IQ.


Not according to a lot of published benchmarks. And not according to
the owners of the biggest OLTP systems on the planet.

But then what does Sybase have to do with the OP's question? The
OP specifically stated a choice between DB2 and Oracle and most likely
either would work just fine. So comments about SQL Server and Sybase
are irrelevant.
The mistake organization make when picking database platform is the
same kind I am seeing from the approach you're taken. If you running
mission critical application, then you should be concern about backup
and recovery. Oracle backup and recovery is too complicated otherwise
they won't need a 4 days training seesion on the topic. It takes a
couple of hours to teach the same function in other platform. My point
is that you have to think of what is important in the application
you're running.


BTW: Oracle backup and recovery unless you are still working with some
Paleolithic version consists of a few mouse clicks in OEM. So your
comments indicate little but ignorance about the product.


Nov 12 '05 #21
Jim Kennedy wrote:
So I guess years of using and having experience with Oracle, DB2, Ingres,
Sybase, Sql Server, XDB, SQL Base (Centura), Btrive, dBase (padadox,
CLipper, Foxpro),my SQL, Isam and others is just too narrow an experience.
I as far as I remember Goob is a pile of mess of buggers. At least my kids
say so.
Jim

boogers not buggers.

Goob would be goobers, etc.

Again, thanks for your comments. According to your list, most of the databases
you have had experience with are gone and practically forgotten. Most if not
all of them are very simple in comparison to Oracle, not even in the same category.
Paradox is gone. Foxpro lives on, and .dbf files live on in many phone dialers to this
day. Sybase is trying to make a comeback, SQL-Server is so not interesting because of
Sybase. The only one you mentioned with any glamour would be Ingres.

Interesting to have read a little of that book I mentioned, "SOFTWAR", about Ellison,
and what he thought of Ingres--he was very impressed according to the author, with
Dr. Stonebreaker and how good the engineering was in Ingres. It's enough of a
statement to get me interested in Ingres again--there may be something there to
use in a business context--and certainly for the person with the original post
to this thread.

Thanks Jim, I'll be waiting for your review of Empress, the only one you
seemed to have missed--er well their was Progress too.... so many players,
so little left to choose from.

"Data Goob" <da******@hotma il.com> wrote in message
news:Zs******** ***@fe55.usenet server.com...
Jim,

Thanks for your comments. I disagree that I'm 'completely' wrong, but it
doesn't really matter, I'm not using Oracle. Oracle is a beast of a pig
all the way around, but you would only know that if you used something
besides Oracle. Oracle has excellent marketing, pay no attention to the
man behind the curtain.

Thanks!

Jim Kennedy wrote:


Nov 12 '05 #22
Mark Townsend wrote:
Data Goob wrote:
Interesting viewpoints about Oracle vs IBM.

I recently scanned through the autobiography about Larry Ellison called
"SOFTWAR", at my local bookstore. Very interesting book, and full of a
lot of interesting information, and lots of innaccuracies. The telling
point at least to me was about Larry and what the company is all about.
( You can find it in the business book section under "arrogance" 8-)

So your comments are based on a brief scan of a 500 page book in a
bookstore, written by a journalist about a single person, and on that
you determine the usefulness of the technology produced by over 40,000
other people ? Great analysis.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=goob&r=f


They don't have Data Goob, only Goob, so you missed! ;-)

In the book they mention that Oracle is more about applications than the
database. If you have an application that requires Oracle, you will
indeed
have to use Oracle. But I would caution against using Oracle as a
database
choice especially in light of where your people are in skills. In
Larry's
own words they indicate the direction of the company has less to do with
being a database company and more to do with applications.

Complete and utter bullshit. You have absolutely NO basis for your
characterizatio n, yet you make it. Why ?


It was based on experience?

Larry is in
his own words more interesting in winning than providing a product that
is indicative of being a good technology choice. Certainly the grid is
interesting, but it is not necessarily clustering, nor is it really even
applicable to a lot of business requirements.

You obviously have no idea how the grid applies to business. Note that
one of the foremost proponents of the grid architecture is indeed Ford.


Enlighten me on the grid. I'm getting my SETI screen-saver fired up, and
turning on the Lava Lamp. LOL.

Oracle will be a big nut
to crack in an organization that has never used a relational database.

2 days is all it takes - see
http://download-west.oracle.com/docs...b10742/toc.htm
Scan it online.


I'd like to but what's the point?

IBM has an excellent set of databases, and the company can also sell you
a complete end-to-end solution, meaning hardware as well as software.

They cannot actually sell you any business applications, can they. A
complete end-to-end as long as you take the actual business out of the
definition of the solution (you know, HR, General Ledger, Mnaufacturing,
Supply Chain etc). You are a silly person.

Personal attacks aside...is there a problem running software from another
vendor? According to Ford they weren't impressed with Oracle enough after
all that work and wasted money. Oracle certainly lost on that one.
I
have seen the latest results on benchmarks and both Oracle and DB2 are
at the top. IBM will dominate the landscape with Power5 hardware, and
Power6, etc. with loads of innovation that I do not see coming from
any other vendor.

Correct - IBM hardware is very,very good. Both Oracle and DB2 run very
well on it.

However, hardware innovation does not = software innovation.

It's interesting that Oracle has to partner with HP and Superdomes and all
that but looks like the ole Superdome is toast along with Sun. Sun is done
too with the hardware. Pretty soon Sun will have to start selling furniture
or home appliances just to stay relevant. Maybe Home Depot can pick them
up and help build the Java-enabled home. LOL.

DB2 is NOT particulary innovative software, and indeed, a large part of
the DB2 software devleopment plans are to provide features from other
databases to aid in migration from SQL Server and Oracle - witness the
addition of both indentities and sequences in the last couple of
releases. The latest release of DB2 is a prime example of this - there
is very little that is actually innovative (or even new) in the 8.2
release.

Can't argue with that, but it's nice to know DB2 is a great choice out there
so that I don't have just MS-SQL or Oracle to choose from. Kinda like the
three bears story, DB2 is juuuuuuuuust right.

It is indeed important to make the choice in the right context as others
have indicated. Should it really be Oracle vs DB2 as a database choice?
Or in your case DB2 vs SQL-Server or Ingres or MySQL or Informix? These
are database products that would probably be more suited to a comparison
today. Incidentally Oracle has not had a major architectural change in
its engine since V7, and that was what, 10+ yrs ago? SQL-Server hasn't
had a major upgrade in what 6 yrs? DB2 has been changing rapidly to meet
the market, and so are a few of the others.

You are confusing two things. All databases meet new market
requirements, some faster than others, and none of them should require
major architectural changes to do so. If a database company has required
a major architectural change in the last 10 years to meet new market
requirements then that is an indication that they have screwed up big
time in their planning. The only DB that I'm aware of that did a
complete rewrite in the last 10-20 years was Informix with the advent of
SMP technology, and look what hapopened to them.


I would hardly make that nexis. SMP is interesting in its own right, with
that whole cylce suddenly going through a dramatic change. Power5, Power6, are
putting an end to SMP as we know it. Unisys, god they went and tried to get
into the Wintel Mainframe, and now, two short years later, it's irrelevant.
They wanted "cellular partitioning" but it is so expensive for even a simple
16 CPU machine--a domain that Windows does poorly in. Unisys and Microsoft
thought they could do it with Intel hardware, but it's total crap. Virtualization
yes, it is the new domain, but more to do with software with less emphasis on the
CPU-count. Power5 makes the other players really look toast. Intel is running
out of gas, AMD is eating their lunch, and IBM is going to dominate the CPU channel
going forward. It's not going to happen overnight, but it is happening.
I hope you are not implying that DB2 has had a major architectural
change in the last 10 years as it simply hasn't (indeed it's still based
on techniques pioneered over 40 years ago, such as shared nothing, read
locks, aries etc).

Unless I'm mistaken the clustering and partitioning features of DB2 clearly
are relatively new, in the past few years.
Go with the latest not the
late.

Go with the proven not the unproved. Leading edge not bleeding edge. You
are a silly person.


C'mon Mark, no need to attack me personally. Real Data Goobs use several
database products, not locked into one vendor. :-)
Interesting too that DB2 is morphing very rapidly, responding to
what customers want. This should be a big checkbox no matter what your
choice. You won't need the grid unless you're part of the SETI project.

By all means please continue to avoid the grid. Do so with a fervour,
and by all means base your technical analysis of products based on a
scan of a book in a book store, and your own personal feelings about a
single person.


Thanks. BTW, I didn't buy the book it was priced too high! LOL. Just
like the software.
Not for you is any interest in low cost computing, or the practical
application of the principles of consolidation, commoditization ,
standardization and automation to Information Technology.

Now here you score points for muddy water. The grid == SETI screen saver.
We don't need a screen saver in our organization. Thanks. But we are
doing things with low-cost computing that work extremely well without the
screen saver. I realize Oracle has to sell visionary visions, but let's
get our priorities straight--whatever happened to the Oracle PowerBrowser?
LOL.

The grid absolutely does not and should not have a place in your future.
Whew! Thanks for the memo.
BTW, Darwin was absolutely correct.You might want to scan "The Origin of
Species" the next time you are in a book store.


Even the dinosaurs had to eat something. Soon Oracle will be extinct too.

:-)


Daniel Morgan wrote:
You're using a wrong approach to determine the RDBMS that will suit
your need. The kind of application you're thinking of running should
be the first concern. Are you goning to be running OLTP, DDS or
datawarehouse application. I don't think Oracle will bet UDB, Sybase
or SQL Server when it comes to OLTP application. As far as
datawarehouse is concern, Sybase has a specific product that is design
for that specific application called Sybase IQ.


Not according to a lot of published benchmarks. And not according to
the owners of the biggest OLTP systems on the planet.

But then what does Sybase have to do with the OP's question? The
OP specifically stated a choice between DB2 and Oracle and most likely
either would work just fine. So comments about SQL Server and Sybase
are irrelevant.

The mistake organization make when picking database platform is the
same kind I am seeing from the approach you're taken. If you running
mission critical application, then you should be concern about backup
and recovery. Oracle backup and recovery is too complicated otherwise
they won't need a 4 days training seesion on the topic. It takes a
couple of hours to teach the same function in other platform. My point
is that you have to think of what is important in the application
you're running.


BTW: Oracle backup and recovery unless you are still working with some
Paleolithic version consists of a few mouse clicks in OEM. So your
comments indicate little but ignorance about the product.


Nov 12 '05 #23
Data Goob wrote:
In
Larry's
own words they indicate the direction of the company has less to do with
being a database company and more to do with applications.


Complete and utter bullshit. You have absolutely NO basis for your
characterizatio n, yet you make it. Why ?


It was based on experience?


Who's ?


You obviously have no idea how the grid applies to business. Note that
one of the foremost proponents of the grid architecture is indeed Ford.


Enlighten me on the grid. I'm getting my SETI screen-saver fired up, and
turning on the Lava Lamp. LOL.

Presuming that this was not a rhetorical question, the argument goes
something like this.

Silo's of computing are bad. Seperately configured systems for
individual workloads are bad - high cost, each over worked individually
but under utilized in terms of resources across the company. Labour
intensive. Difficult to integrate, make secure, make highly available.

So as an alternative, consider a grid. As follows

Consider data management software that stores not only characters
numbers and dates, but all your email, all your documents, all your
multimedia, all your spatial, all your XML. Everything digital that you
may care about. Not only that, but can truely do cross domain queries -
for example, a single query that anwsers the question - "Find me all
customers who previously placed but cancelled an order over the web (in
XML), for a product whose shipping instructions mentioned special
handling requirements due to fagility, where those customers are now
with 5 miles of the new store we are just opening"

Place this data on a storage grid based on SAN or NAS storage shared
amongst multiple systems, complete with intelligent software that
automatically manages the data placement to give maximum performance and
availablity for all those systems. The same data management software
that then automatically backs up this data, automatically allows any
change made in error to the data to be undo, automatically mirrors the
data across two or more physical storage grids for redundancy and
disaster recovery. Then add the ability to horizontally manage the
physical storage across the organization simply by adding new disks to
the storage grid and have the storage grid then automatically (and
online) maintain the most optimal data/disk layout. Do this on with any
disk solution, anywhere, and even with emerging low cost ATA technology.

Consider then the database grid - the machines that access the data on
behalf of the applications. Consider a cluster of these machines, all
very low cost commodity hardware, each with 2-4 cpus, intellgently
sharing the workload and access to this data. Have workloads be able to
expand across the physical boundary of a single machine. Have each
workload definable as a level one object in the taxonomy, and be able to
dynamically add or remove machines to and from a workload. Have service
levels definable that determine how one defined workload should be
failed over to other machines in event of an outage. Have service levels
definable that determine the required performance characteristics for
each workload, with the ability to react to an outage in the service by
adding (or removing) more machines. Do this on any hardware, with any
operating system.

Do the same thing at the application server grid level, but now also
include all the web services, BPEL and SOA good geekness that is in that
environment (of which I know little). Have the same service level
definition of a workload that is defined at the storage and database
level apply here as well, for end-to-end monitoring up and down the
stack, and eventual dynamic sharing of the machine resources between the
database and application server layer. Have the same definition of a
user up and down through the entire stack as well. Manage ALL the users
access, security, roles etc in one central location, with ALL other
software using this information consistently - the same Mark Townsend -
from the application login, to the browser cookie, to the app server
connection, to the JDBC connection, to the proxied user identity in the
database telling the system what I can and cannot access.

Then provide built in application level monitoring software that can
start from the end user and trace a representative transaction up and
down the stack - all the way from the browser across the network to the
app server to the Java container to the executed SQL to the the storage
IO. Have defined service levels for these transactions as part of the
workload definition. Automatically alert an administrator if the service
level starts to fail and provide the ability to profile where the
problem is from one end to another, with the ability to step into any
layer in the stack and diagnose the problem using wizards and advisors.
Do this end to end tracing from any endpoint in the network. Then have
the software just do this automatically for you, and simply tell you
what needs to be fixed, by when, and how.

Then provide configuration management software that allows you to define
the standard configuration for any one of these component layers, as
well as your best practice security, HA, performance and deployment
procedures. Centrally manage these configurations, and as new
machines/disks arrives, just blow these configurations out to them and
remotely build the machines. Automatically check every day with the
vendor to see if any urgent patches/fixes are required to YOUR specific
configuration. If so, have them downloaded to the central repository,
and have these blown out to the targets as well. Have the same software
then automatically checks every 24 hours to see that your best practice
configurations have not been bypassed.
Then build a suite of business application on top of this.

The grid is a little more than lava lamps and SETI screen savers. SETI
was all about an organization without money finding ways to borrow
machine cycles from other people. Good for SETI, but not going to happen
for Ford, Boeing etc - Ford is not going to go to GM and say "run this
workload for me, I can't afford to". Instead, commercial grids are
built, not borrowed, and the future of the grid is all about the
practical application of well known consolidation, commodization,
standardization and automation techniques to the problem of deploying IT
solutions more efficiently. The Grid is to IT what the Ford Model T
assembly line was to Manufacturing. And most importantly, you can start
anywhere with this. Each of the advantages is achievable in it's own
right, with it's own individual value prop and ROI calculation. And as
you complete more and more of the jigsaw, over time, the ROI increases,
and increases, and increases.

It's going to be a fun few years.

Nov 12 '05 #24
Mark Townsend wrote:
Data Goob wrote:
In
Larry's
own words they indicate the direction of the company has less to do
with
being a database company and more to do with applications.


Complete and utter bullshit. You have absolutely NO basis for your
characterizatio n, yet you make it. Why ?

It was based on experience?

Who's ?


Actually to get you back on track, read through Larry's book, the words are
in the book, not quoting, but close enough, Oracle is more about applications
than databases. ( the book is "SOFTWAR" )

As far as my experiences with Oracle, it is the most expensive database
product on the market, not to mention one of the most complicated.

Now let's move along to your acid trip...

Assuming you are 100% correct about the grid, commodity/utility computing,
SETI, and all that, why on earth would Oracle be relevant in the equation?
As if they are the only ones who figured it out? As if they are the right
choice for that? As if the grid is even relevant...

Smoke some more Mark... break out the bong...

You obviously have no idea how the grid applies to business. Note
that one of the foremost proponents of the grid architecture is
indeed Ford.

Enlighten me on the grid. I'm getting my SETI screen-saver fired up, and
turning on the Lava Lamp. LOL.

Presuming that this was not a rhetorical question, the argument goes
something like this.

Silo's of computing are bad. Seperately configured systems for
individual workloads are bad - high cost, each over worked individually
but under utilized in terms of resources across the company. Labour
intensive. Difficult to integrate, make secure, make highly available.

So as an alternative, consider a grid. As follows

<snipped>
Later that same day...
The grid is a little more than lava lamps and SETI screen savers. SETI
was all about an organization without money finding ways to borrow
machine cycles from other people. Good for SETI, but not going to happen
for Ford, Boeing etc - Ford is not going to go to GM and say "run this
workload for me, I can't afford to". Instead, commercial grids are
built, not borrowed, and the future of the grid is all about the
practical application of well known consolidation, commodization,
standardization and automation techniques to the problem of deploying IT
solutions more efficiently. The Grid is to IT what the Ford Model T
assembly line was to Manufacturing. And most importantly, you can start
anywhere with this. Each of the advantages is achievable in it's own
right, with it's own individual value prop and ROI calculation. And as
you complete more and more of the jigsaw, over time, the ROI increases,
and increases, and increases.

It's going to be a fun few years.

With the drugs you're gettin? whooooo hoooooooo!

Nov 12 '05 #25
Data Goob wrote:
I remain jealous of you Daniel for having access to really good weed!
It seems
to have the intended effect. Must be that stuff from Vancouver I heard
about.
I'm about 40 years too old to care what they smoke anywhere.
Anyway since you opened the door...

DB2 is far less difficult to understand and master than Oracle. More
specifically Oracle is the difficult database, whereas DB2 is a breeze to install and
use.
And you say that based on exactly what experience, how long ago, on what
versions based on what training? This sentence is meaningless and you
know it.
Oracle is a collection of disparate pieces of bolt-on software that
requires years
to "master" and lots of people to make it successful.
If you think others are smoking something surely you are injecting
something. What a load of pure rubbish.

This is why it is happy
in larger organizations and completely inappropriate in smaller ones. DB2
has a clearly defined scalability that Oracle has yet to implement.
Which of course explains why it undersells Oracle on Windows and Linux.
Instead
Oracle continues to opt for smoke and mirrors.
Well that and sales.

10g has yet to be proven in the business world as even relevant, much less RAC ( bwaahahaaaa! :-)
Laugh. Thelargest airplane manufacturing company in America is
implementing production systems with RAC for line-of-business apps.
DB2? I'm sure there a few legacy systems laying around. So what
exactly are you laughing about?

I would
say DB2 and SQL-Server are more equivalent in ease of use, but the
differentiator
in DB2 is that it can scale way beyond what SQL-Server can, on low-cost
hardware,
and O/S.
I would say you haven't actually used Oracle in years and are expressing
not technical knowledge but personal ignorance.

Oracle requires a lot of money, time, and hardware, something I would
be very concerned about as a business wanting to be competitive and keep
costs
down.


Oracle licensing starts at $749 (SE1 5 named user license). Take the
needle out of your arm and go to http://store.oracle.com where you can
confirm it if you wish.

--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)

Nov 12 '05 #26
Data Goob wrote:
Jim,

Thanks for your comments. I disagree that I'm 'completely' wrong, but it
doesn't really matter, I'm not using Oracle. Oracle is a beast of a pig
all the way around, but you would only know that if you used something
besides Oracle. Oracle has excellent marketing, pay no attention to the
man behind the curtain.

Thanks!


Anecdotal inflammatory nonsense lacking in substance. If you have any
actual experience from which to draw the conclusions you have state it!

--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)

Nov 12 '05 #27
> Actually to get you back on track, read through Larry's book, the words are
in the book, not quoting, but close enough, Oracle is more about
applications than databases. ( the book is "SOFTWAR" )
And IBM is more about hardware than databases. Apparently you don't have
an actual point so you just made one up.
As far as my experiences with Oracle, it is the most expensive database
product on the market, not to mention one of the most complicated.
Which speaks volumes about your experience doesn't it. How exactly is a
license for $749 USD expensive?
Now let's move along to your acid trip...
The only acid I'm seeing here is nitric.
Assuming you are 100% correct about the grid, commodity/utility computing,
SETI, and all that, why on earth would Oracle be relevant in the equation?
As if they are the only ones who figured it out? As if they are the right
choice for that? As if the grid is even relevant...


Maybe not the only ones to figure it out. But I a lot closer to the mark
than anyone else. Unless you are one of those that promotes UNION ALL as
database partitioning.

--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)

Nov 12 '05 #28

"Daniel Morgan" <da******@x.was hington.edu> wrote in message
news:1093732503 .821888@yasure. ..
Actually to get you back on track, read through Larry's book, the words are in the book, not quoting, but close enough, Oracle is more about
applications than databases. ( the book is "SOFTWAR" )


And IBM is more about hardware than databases. Apparently you don't have
an actual point so you just made one up.
As far as my experiences with Oracle, it is the most expensive database
product on the market, not to mention one of the most complicated.


Which speaks volumes about your experience doesn't it. How exactly is a
license for $749 USD expensive?
Now let's move along to your acid trip...


The only acid I'm seeing here is nitric.
Assuming you are 100% correct about the grid, commodity/utility computing, SETI, and all that, why on earth would Oracle be relevant in the equation? As if they are the only ones who figured it out? As if they are the right choice for that? As if the grid is even relevant...


Maybe not the only ones to figure it out. But I a lot closer to the mark
than anyone else. Unless you are one of those that promotes UNION ALL as
database partitioning.

--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)


What is really interesting is that this guy is clueless. We have been
using Grid type computing for years in our engineering department to do
builds and QA for our products. But this guy is so behind the curve that he
isn't even aware that some companies were doing this, in a rudimentary form,
back in the mid '80's. We are currently looking at implementing RAC across
multiple applications so we can have redundancy, better load balancing
especially across timezones. As each financial quarter ends it would be
nice to give the order and reporting systems more database priority than
lets say the call center software etc. Or as the day sets and the call
center software needs less database resources - we don't have as many people
in the PacRim - but the datawharehouse loads need more resource. RAC is a
way we could share that resource and not build huge silos.

But hey how do you tell a 17 year old that his elders have more experience.
It is amazing that in 7 years the 17 year old will discover his elders
learned a lot in 7 years. <grin>
Jim
Nov 12 '05 #29
Data Goob wrote:

Actually to get you back on track, read through Larry's book, the words are
in the book, not quoting, but close enough, Oracle is more about
applications
than databases. ( the book is "SOFTWAR" )


I have the book. I have read the book. If you like to send me an address
offline, I'll send it to you. Then you can actually quote chapter and
verse to your heart's content.

Nov 12 '05 #30

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

3
5235
by: Jan Bols | last post by:
I've been trying to install Oracle 8.1.7 on a fresh Mandrake 9.1 O.S for days, but I'm still not able to get it running. I've tried several install instructions that I found on the internet but no luck yet. Here is a short description of what I did so far: 1. I installed the jdk118_v3-glibc-2.1.3.tar in the /usr/local/ dir and made a symbolic link from /usr/local/java to this 2. I installed all the necessary groups and users (oracle,...
4
20009
by: susmita_ganguly | last post by:
Hi I am trying to upgrade from oracle 8i to oracle 9i on the same server ..I don't know much abt migration . Can anyone help me out. Thanks. Susmita
63
25766
by: Nick Palmer | last post by:
Hi all, Is there a DB2 equivilant to Oracle's DB Link functionality ? I have two DB2 databases and I need to get access to the tables in one from the other. In Oracle I would just create a DB Link between the two instances. Is such a thing possible between two DB2 databases ? Thanks in advance, Nick
3
23469
by: Jon Ole Hedne | last post by:
My Access 2002-application need to work with tables from both Oracle and Access. To solve this, I want to run some querys on three views in Oracle and import the results into temporary Access-tables. I have tried this: conn.Provider = "Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0" conn.ConnectionString = "data source=" & datafil & ";Jet OLEDB:Database Password=" conn.Open datafil
13
7492
by: Chris Botha | last post by:
The machine is running XP Pro with all the latest service packs, etc. I must access an Oracle database so I installed the Oracle client stuff. I can query Oracle from a Windows app, no problem. Using the exact same code (copy and paste) into a Web app I get the following error "Error while trying to retrieve text for error ORA-01019". Security I thought, so I use Impersonation on the Web site, then the aspnet_wp.exe crashes with "The...
2
14264
by: Vinod Sadanandan | last post by:
All, Below listed are the new features in Oracle 11g ,please join me in this discussion to generate a testcase and analyze each of the listed features . Precompilers: Additional Array INSERT and SELECT Syntax Support by Pro*C/C++ and Pro*COBOL Precompilers: Dynamic SQL Statement Caching in Pro*C/C++ and Pro*COBOL Precompilers: Fix Execution Plan in Pro*C/C++ and Pro*COBOL Precompilers: Flexible B Area Length...
2
3579
by: Ruslan A Dautkhanov | last post by:
Hello ! I'm about to install O9i on FreeBSD box. uname -a: FreeBSD stat2.scn.ru 5.2.1-RELEASE-p3 FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE-p3 #2: Fri Apr 23 19:19:43 KRAST 2004 rd@stat2.scn.ru:/usr/src/sys/i386/compile/RDSTAT2-ORACLE i386 uname -a under oracle user : Linux stat2.scn.ru 2.4.2 FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE-p3 #2: Fri Apr 23 19:19:43 KRAST 2004 i686 unknown
0
3329
by: Jack | last post by:
Training Classes for Oracle10g, 9i, 8i Certification training in Oracle10g and 9i: DBA, Developer, Discoverer. training conducted at your location worldwide. Courseware licensing also available. http://a.uuload.com/Oracle-Database.htm Unlock the Value of Your IT System Confio Software's Ignite for Oracle uses wait-event analysis to improve database performance by 65% or more. Gain visibility of every Oracle wait event. Download free...
0
3302
by: Winder | last post by:
Training Classes for Oracle10g, 9i, 8i Certification training in Oracle10g and 9i: DBA, Developer, Discoverer. training conducted at your location worldwide. Courseware licensing also available. http://a.uuload.com/Oracle-Database.htm Unlock the Value of Your IT System Confio Software's Ignite for Oracle uses wait-event analysis to improve database performance by 65% or more. Gain visibility of every Oracle wait event. Download free...
0
4654
by: sathyguy | last post by:
when i type the below in my RHEL AS 4's Firefox 1.5 http://appsworld.ncc.com:7777/forms/...&form=test.fmx iam getting the below error... The requested URL /forms/frmservlet was not found on this server. formsweb.cfg contents...... baseHTML=/u01/app/oracle/OraHome_1/forms/server/base.htm
0
9845
by: Hystou | last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it. First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
0
10872
jinu1996
by: jinu1996 | last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that captivates audiences and drives business growth. The Art of Business Website Design Your website is...
1
10981
by: Hystou | last post by:
Overview: Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
0
10499
tracyyun
by: tracyyun | last post by:
Dear forum friends, With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
0
9675
agi2029
by: agi2029 | last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own.... Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
0
5893
by: TSSRALBI | last post by:
Hello I'm a network technician in training and I need your help. I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs. The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols. I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
0
6085
by: adsilva | last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
1
4725
by: 6302768590 | last post by:
Hai team i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
2
4307
muto222
by: muto222 | last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.