By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
438,589 Members | 2,276 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 438,589 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

DB2 versus UDB

P: n/a
I have always been confused abuot the terminology. What is the
difference between DB2 and UDB? Are they one and the same? Is one a
subset of the other?

Thanks in advance.
-Dal Mon

Jul 10 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
3 Replies


P: n/a
Dal Mon wrote:
I have always been confused abuot the terminology. What is the
difference between DB2 and UDB? Are they one and the same? Is one a
subset of the other?
There never was a UDB product.
"Universal Database" was a "property" added to versions of DB2 that had
a certain extensibility options (e.g. LOBs, UDF, distinct types)
(Informix calls it "Universal Server").
DB2 UDB V5 for LUW was the first to "earn" that label.
Therefore many people chose to shorten DB2 UDF for LUW as UDB, implying
that "DB2" is DB2 for zOS.
Over the years DB2 for zOS and DB2 for iSeries also got the UDB label.
Since all major vendors today have these extensibility options, the
label as largely lost its meaning.
DB2 9 (on either LUW or zOS) does not carry the UDB label anymore.

Cheers
Serge
--
Serge Rielau
DB2 Solutions Development
IBM Toronto Lab
Jul 10 '07 #2

P: n/a
Serge Rielau wrote:
Dal Mon wrote:
>I have always been confused abuot the terminology. What is the
difference between DB2 and UDB? Are they one and the same? Is one a
subset of the other?
There never was a UDB product.
"Universal Database" was a "property" added to versions of DB2 that had
a certain extensibility options (e.g. LOBs, UDF, distinct types)
(Informix calls it "Universal Server").
DB2 UDB V5 for LUW was the first to "earn" that label.
Therefore many people chose to shorten DB2 UDF for LUW as UDB, implying
that "DB2" is DB2 for zOS.
Over the years DB2 for zOS and DB2 for iSeries also got the UDB label.
Since all major vendors today have these extensibility options, the
label as largely lost its meaning.
DB2 9 (on either LUW or zOS) does not carry the UDB label anymore.
DB2 for i5/OS (iSeries or System i) also no longer uses the UDB label.

www.ibm.com/servers/eserver/iseries/db2/

--
Karl Hanson
Jul 10 '07 #3

P: n/a
"Dal Mon" <da******@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@g4g2000hsf.googlegro ups.com...
>I have always been confused abuot the terminology. What is the
difference between DB2 and UDB? Are they one and the same? Is one a
subset of the other?

Thanks in advance.
-Dal Mon
This was basically a marketing problem, in that IBM had the following
relational products at one time:

DB2 for MVS
SQL/DS (for VM)
SQL/400 (for AS/400)
OS/2 Database Manager (OS/2) which latter became DB2/2 and then DB2/6000 for
AIX

Oracle always was able to say that they had a single code base for all
platforms (although some of the versions don't work very well on certain
platforms).

So IBM came up with the UDB label for DB2 Linux, Unix, and Windows (and OS/2
up to V7). Then DB2 for z/OS and DB2 for iSeries added the UDB label when
they reached a certain level of compatibility with DB2 for Linux, UNIX and
Windows. This was supposed to be the big merge when all the features where
available on all platforms and the SQL was completely compatible (or 99.9 %
compatible) and they were all called UDB.

The problem is that most corporate customers that had DB2 on the mainframe
and also DB2 LUW used the UDB label to refer the DB2 for LUW product (as
opposed to the mainframe DB2) and the UDB nickname stuck to the LUW product
before the z/OS version had a chance to adopt the UDB name. As already
mentioned, the UDB name is being dropped on all platforms.

You can blame the IBM marketing people for this fiasco, but ultimately it
may be the customer's fault because they are the ones who fall for marketing
BS, such as buying a database based on features that they will never use (or
maybe never should use) or running on platforms they will never use.
Jul 11 '07 #4

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.