Company thought DB2 will be better than Oracle.

[Peter]

Company thought DB2 will be better than Oracle.
The bottom line is when you do select, the system crash.

I think it may take 4-5 years for DB2 to reach Oracle standard.
Peter

[Peter]

Friends!

I am not anti DB2. It is a good
database on Main Frames system.

System crash, if it has not happened on your
production server running DB2 so far, please
wait for 6-8 months.
Peter

wi*******@yahoo .com.au (Noons) wrote in message news:<73******* *************** ****@posting.go ogle.com>...

"Mark A" <ma@switchboard .net> wrote in message news:<pr******* *********@news. uswest.net>...

"Peter" <pe************ ****@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:39******** *************** ***@posting.goo gle.com...

Company thought DB2 will be better than Oracle.
The bottom line is when you do select, the system crash.

I think it may take 4-5 years for DB2 to reach Oracle standard.
Peter

Maybe it's a problem with the DBA's.

x-post trimmed in the interests of sanity...
I thought DB2 didn't need DBAs, that was just another
"expensive option" needed only for Oracle?
Tsk,tsk, there goes the TCO crap...

Cheers
Nuno Souto
wi*******@yahoo .com.au.nospam

[Mark A]

> Friends!

I am not anti DB2. It is a good
database on Main Frames system.

System crash, if it has not happened on your
production server running DB2 so far, please
wait for 6-8 months.
Peter

DB2 is good on Unix, Linux, and Windows also. DBA's don't like DB2 because
it takes fewer of them to operate and they think there are more Oracle jobs
in the marketplace. All systems have problems occasionally, just ask Ebay
about their outages caused by Oracle crashes and hangs.

If you personally had problems that could not be resolved with IBM support,
then maybe it was unique to your situation and use of the product.

[Database Guy]

Larry <ls*****@us.ibm .com> wrote in message news:<3F******* ********@us.ibm .com>...

Hmmm. So ... no details. No version/release levels ... no platform
information. No details on what you were trying to do. No details on the
application. No details on the crash. No details on what the corrective
fix was. You're obviously more experienced with Oracle. And you're ready
to pass judgement on DB2 already?

Larry

Peter wrote:

Company thought DB2 will be better than Oracle.
The bottom line is when you do select, the system crash.

I think it may take 4-5 years for DB2 to reach Oracle standard.

Peter

Troll, or part of a new Oracle marketing ploy?
DG

[Daniel Morgan]

Mark A wrote:

Friends!

I am not anti DB2. It is a good
database on Main Frames system.

System crash, if it has not happened on your
production server running DB2 so far, please
wait for 6-8 months.
Peter

DB2 is good on Unix, Linux, and Windows also. DBA's don't like DB2 because
it takes fewer of them to operate and they think there are more Oracle jobs
in the marketplace. All systems have problems occasionally, just ask Ebay
about their outages caused by Oracle crashes and hangs.

If you personally had problems that could not be resolved with IBM support,
then maybe it was unique to your situation and use of the product.

Just ask anybody about their crashes. What nonsense. Most systems crash
for the same reason most cars crash ... bad drivers.

But I'd stay away from promoting DB2 on Windows. I can't think of much
worse than a database with almost no built-in security on an operating
system with ... well ... almost no built-in security. Oracle and
Informix are far better choices if security is a concern.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Daniel Morgan]

Mark A wrote:

<snipped>

DB2 is good on Unix, Linux, and Windows also. DBA's don't like DB2 because
it takes fewer of them to operate and they think there are more Oracle jobs
in the marketplace.

<snipped>

Couldn't possibly be the lack of security without Tivoli or other
similar products?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of training classes?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of books?
Couldn't possibly be the fact that you need a C compiler on a production
box?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of third-party tools and applications?
Couldn't possibly be ....

And this from someone with 10+ years of DB2.

In short ... there are plenty of reasons why someone might not like DB2.
Which does not mean I am one of them. But rather to try to pin it on
DBAs is a bit of a farse. Oracle, itself, is currently redesigning the
DBA's roles and responsibilitie s to be less RDBMS management and more
and more integration with application servers and other components. The
idea that Oracle is hard to manage is just a repetition of mythology: It
is no longer true. Just as many things about DB2 that were true five
years ago are no longer true.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Mark A]

> >DB2 is good on Unix, Linux, and Windows also. DBA's don't like DB2
because

it takes fewer of them to operate and they think there are more Oracle jobsin the marketplace.

Couldn't possibly be the lack of security without Tivoli or other
similar products?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of training classes?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of books?
Couldn't possibly be the fact that you need a C compiler on a production
box?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of third-party tools and applications?
Couldn't possibly be ....

And this from someone with 10+ years of DB2.

In short ... there are plenty of reasons why someone might not like DB2.
Which does not mean I am one of them. But rather to try to pin it on
DBAs is a bit of a farse. Oracle, itself, is currently redesigning the
DBA's roles and responsibilitie s to be less RDBMS management and more
and more integration with application servers and other components. The
idea that Oracle is hard to manage is just a repetition of mythology: It
is no longer true. Just as many things about DB2 that were true five
years ago are no longer true.

--
Daniel Morgan

Those might be good reasons (if they were all true, but I don't agree that
they are) for a manager to make that decision in favor of one product over
another. But 90% of DBA's only care about the state of the job market and
how their skills match up to that market.

[Peter]

I am only asking you to wait and watch on
production server of DB2 ,instance disappearance
because of select SQL query on a small table.
Peter

db******@hotmai l.com (Database Guy) wrote in message news:<7f******* *************** ****@posting.go ogle.com>...

Larry <ls*****@us.ibm .com> wrote in message news:<3F******* ********@us.ibm .com>...

Hmmm. So ... no details. No version/release levels ... no platform
information. No details on what you were trying to do. No details on the
application. No details on the crash. No details on what the corrective
fix was. You're obviously more experienced with Oracle. And you're ready
to pass judgement on DB2 already?

Larry

Peter wrote:

Company thought DB2 will be better than Oracle.
The bottom line is when you do select, the system crash.

I think it may take 4-5 years for DB2 to reach Oracle standard.

Peter

Troll, or part of a new Oracle marketing ploy?
DG

[Larry Edelstein]

Daniel,

I don't have any problem with you expressing your opinion. But I do have to set
the record straight.

What lack of security? DB2 uses the underlying OS for authentication security
and has the same internal object security that other rdbmses have. Can you
provide more specifics on what you mean by this and how it manifests itself in
the form of any issues?

Plenty of DB2 training classes. Take a look at the IBM Education schedules.

There are some very good DB2 books published on DB2. Do we need tons of them by
different authors each serving the same purpose?

What makes you think that you need a compiler on a production box? I do not
think that is accurate.

And as far as the third-party tools and applications, I can't believe you took a
swat at that one. There were something like > 40000 last time I checked.

Your points are sometimes well-taken. With all due respect, these had some
significant inaccuracies.

Larry Edelstein

Daniel Morgan wrote:

Mark A wrote:

<snipped>

DB2 is good on Unix, Linux, and Windows also. DBA's don't like DB2 because
it takes fewer of them to operate and they think there are more Oracle jobs
in the marketplace.

<snipped>

Couldn't possibly be the lack of security without Tivoli or other
similar products?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of training classes?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of books?
Couldn't possibly be the fact that you need a C compiler on a production
box?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of third-party tools and applications?
Couldn't possibly be ....

And this from someone with 10+ years of DB2.

In short ... there are plenty of reasons why someone might not like DB2.
Which does not mean I am one of them. But rather to try to pin it on
DBAs is a bit of a farse. Oracle, itself, is currently redesigning the
DBA's roles and responsibilitie s to be less RDBMS management and more
and more integration with application servers and other components. The
idea that Oracle is hard to manage is just a repetition of mythology: It
is no longer true. Just as many things about DB2 that were true five
years ago are no longer true.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Daniel Morgan]

Mark A wrote:

DB2 is good on Unix, Linux, and Windows also. DBA's don't like DB2

because

it takes fewer of them to operate and they think there are more Oracle

jobs

in the marketplace.

Couldn't possibly be the lack of security without Tivoli or other
similar products?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of training classes?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of books?
Couldn't possibly be the fact that you need a C compiler on a production
box?
Couldn't possibly be the lack of third-party tools and applications?
Couldn't possibly be ....

And this from someone with 10+ years of DB2.

In short ... there are plenty of reasons why someone might not like DB2.
Which does not mean I am one of them. But rather to try to pin it on
DBAs is a bit of a farse. Oracle, itself, is currently redesigning the
DBA's roles and responsibilitie s to be less RDBMS management and more
and more integration with application servers and other components. The
idea that Oracle is hard to manage is just a repetition of mythology: It
is no longer true. Just as many things about DB2 that were true five
years ago are no longer true.

--
Daniel Morgan

Those might be good reasons (if they were all true, but I don't agree that
they are) for a manager to make that decision in favor of one product over
another. But 90% of DBA's only care about the state of the job market and
how their skills match up to that market.

And why shouldn't they. The old social contract where employees were
loyal to companies and companies were loyal to employees was stabbed in
the back by MBA's quite a few years ago. Boeing, for example, has no
shortage of people
whose jobs were off-shored just because it saved a few dollars.

And I'm not saying Boeing is bad and that I wouldn't have done the same
in their position ... but under such conditions why shouldn't a DBA be
thinking about the mortgage and putting the kids through college?

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

[Daniel Morgan]

Comments interspersed.

Larry Edelstein wrote:

Daniel,

I don't have any problem with you expressing your opinion. But I do have to set
the record straight.

What lack of security? DB2 uses the underlying OS for authentication security
and has the same internal object security that other rdbmses have. Can you
provide more specifics on what you mean by this and how it manifests itself in
the form of any issues?
My point was not that DB2 was unsecure on mainframes and UNIX ... but
rather on Windows. Because, as demonstrated every week by a bunch of
teenagers and 20 year olds ... the O/S itself is insecure.
Plenty of DB2 training classes. Take a look at the IBM Education schedules.
Exactly. Now try to find them from third-party training facilities here
in Washington State, for example. Or from a community college or a
university? And books? Try Amazon.com for example ... 245 DB2 books and
how many relate to Windows? Then try Oracle ... 1128. Do you see the
issue? And with Oracle there is a single code base an all operating
systems so one book covers all platforms. Something not true with DB2.
There are some very good DB2 books published on DB2. Do we need tons of them by
different authors each serving the same purpose?
The reference in my post was to DB2 on Windows. Don't try to make it
into something it was not intended to be.
What makes you think that you need a compiler on a production box? I do not
think that is accurate.
From my experience it is. Or do you run your databases without procedures?
And as far as the third-party tools and applications, I can't believe you took a
swat at that one. There were something like > 40000 last time I checked.
Third party means from companies other than IBM. And once again my
reference was to the Windows platform only.
Your points are sometimes well-taken. With all due respect, these had some
significant inaccuracies.

Larry Edelstein

Please reconsider. I am a DB2 user so I'm not slamming the product. But
it has its fair share of weaknesses just as all products do. And I just
think it is unfair to slam those that disagree with you as greedy DBAs
that only care about their jobs. Though, as I've also posted ... the
mortgage and putting the kids through college comes light-years before
product loyalty. Neither IBM, nor Oracle, nor Microsoft is writing
checks to me so I'm still responsible for the balance in the checkbook.

--
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...ad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/e...oa/aoa_crs.asp
da******@x.wash ington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)