473,326 Members | 2,680 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post Job

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 473,326 software developers and data experts.

Comparison of DB2 and Oracle?

One of my friends, Scott, is a consultant who doesn't currently have
newsgroup access so I am asking these questions for him. I'll be telling him
how to monitor the answers via Google Newsgroup searches.

Scott has heard a lot of hype about DB2 and Oracle and is trying to
understand the pros and cons of each product. I'm quite familiar with DB2
but have never used Oracle so I can't make any meaningful comparisons for
him. He does not have a lot of database background but sometimes has to
choose or recommend a database to his clients.

Scott has enough life-experience to take the marketing information produced
by IBM and Oracle with a grain of salt and would like to hear from real
DBAs, especially ones who are fluent with both products, for their views on
two questions:

1. What are the pros and cons of the current releases of DB2 and Oracle?

2. What other sources of *independent* information are available to help
someone new to databases choose between DB2 and Oracle?

This is *not* a troll and we don't want to start a flame war! Scott just
want some honest facts to help him decide which product is best at which
jobs.

--
Rhino
Jul 19 '05
125 15276
Jim's comment about zOS behavior is what I also remember from my
mainframe days. My recollection is that this was (is?) a characteristic
of mainframe QMF because QMF interacts directly with the user and the
SQL statements don't complete until the user closes the session. We even
had a case where a user ran a query then went to lunch without
terminating it and held locks for over an hour!

The solution I implemented was to switch to using DSNTEP2 (a freebie
supplied with DB2) as a replacement for QMF for simple queries. Heavy
duty reporting was moved to "canned" QMF procedures where knowledgeable
programmers could optimize performance and concurrency.

Phil Sherman

Serge Rielau wrote:
Jim,

I can't comment on DB2 for zOS. Would be interested to know whether this
behaviour is still in existence and whether it was condidered working as
designed or a bug (e.g. a bad lock).
The behaviour you describe seems to indicate that users also wouldn't be
able to bind static apps concurrently.....

Cheers
Serge


Jul 19 '05 #51
JS
DA Morgan <da******@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1098250365.710337@yasure>...
Rhino wrote:
Nobody's looking for a free ride. He/we just wanted to hear from people who
had used BOTH products to see what their pros and cons were. He/we also
wanted recommendations about good independent sources of reviews of these
products. That's exactly what I asked for.

Rhino


And exactly what you are not going to get as I haven't found a single
post from anyone that believes you. It is absolutely impossible for the
situation you presented to be true.


the true answer to the original question posted, which was, which db
is better, is: it's a tie, both products under the control of
experienced DBA('s) (and let's not forget the developer's) will do the
job for which they were designed.
Both products can scale indefinately, perhaps db2 has better locking
mechanism but overall you would have to slice the product very thinly
to declare a true winner. That said, db2 is cheaper, so in my mind you
get more bang for the buck with db2.
Jul 19 '05 #52
JS wrote:
That said, db2 is cheaper, so in my mind you
get more bang for the buck with db2.


I note the following from http://oraclestore.oracle.com (US) and
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/info...cts/index.html

Personal:

DB2 UDB PERSONAL EDITION INSTALL LIC+SW MAINT 12 MO (D5B69LL) 461.00
Oracle Database Personal Edition - Named User Plus Perpetual[$400.00]
(add 15% for support) = $60

The licensing agreements on the IBM site are moderately confusing for me
(I'm familiar with Oracle's licensing mess), but IF I interpret them
correctly, having checked the numbers for other versions ...

the LIST price for DB2 at any version, personal / workgroup /
enterprise / and so on seems roughly equivalent to the Oracle
counterpart, within a reasonable error.

From what I can tell, DB2 provides the opportunity to buy more options,
resumably because the capabilities are not included in the base line. But,
in fairness, in both cases I see options that are not in the other, and I
assume that the items that are not listed as options are embedded in the
base product.

The only discussion can be from a list price perspective and standard
discounts - all bets are off when negotiating prices as there are to many
additional variables.

So I see NO PRICING advantage to DB2.

My conclusion: I could agree with your comment that DB2 is cheaper (if you
insist on sticking with that), but I perceive it is NOT less expensive.

/Hans

Jul 19 '05 #53
wi*******@yahoo.com.au (Noons) wrote in message news:<73**************************@posting.google. com>...
mi*****************@yahoo.com (Mikito Harakiri) wrote in message news:<8a*************************@posting.google.c om>...
Let's not forget that RDBMS essentially is a SQL execution engine, and
Most definitely not. That is a file system.


Are you kidding?
A *database* (that is what the
"D" in RDBMS stands for) is not even necessarily a SQL execution engine:
it could be an execution engine for many other languages.


By RDBMS I have meant SQL DBMS; this is what all vendors are offering.

It is SQL interface that makes DBMS that powerful, not bells and
whistles. Some procedural to SQL is warranted, because user-defined
functions make SQL more powerful. Analytic exptensions arguably makes
SQL even mightier. And, sorry, junk XML extensions don't make SQL more
powerful.
everything else should be judged from the perspective how well does it
fit into that primary purpose. Therefore, let's go through your list
itemized:


Your primary purpose is totally wrong. You don't need a RDBMS,
you need only a SQL engine. Obviously, you can do everything
else the database can do, yourself, and better. What can I say?


SQL is high level programmatic environment. Did I ever say I don't
need high level programming environment and goind to reimplement it
myself? Or I'm talking to DBA, who usually have no idea what
programmatic environment is?
Jul 19 '05 #54
"Mikito Harakiri" <mi*****************@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8a*************************@posting.google.co m...
wi*******@yahoo.com.au (Noons) wrote in message

news:<73**************************@posting.google. com>...
mi*****************@yahoo.com (Mikito Harakiri) wrote in message news:<8a*************************@posting.google.c om>...
everything else should be judged from the perspective how well does it
fit into that primary purpose. Therefore, let's go through your list
itemized:


Your primary purpose is totally wrong. You don't need a RDBMS,
you need only a SQL engine. Obviously, you can do everything
else the database can do, yourself, and better. What can I say?


SQL is high level programmatic environment. Did I ever say I don't
need high level programming environment and goind to reimplement it
myself? Or I'm talking to DBA, who usually have no idea what
programmatic environment is?


You probably have meant that there is much more to RDBMS than just SQL
engine. One need to store tables somewhere, there should be a way to connect
client somehow, etc. DBAs usually make a great deal out of those gory
implementation details. In that case I have a news for you: there is not
much demand in marketplace for masters of segments and extents anymore --
it's automated. The art of juggling init.ora parameters is on its way to
obsolescense as well. Once again, it's SQL interface is what defines
database, and would stay with us for quite a while.
Jul 19 '05 #55
michael newport wrote:
correction you thought that you had made your point...

You can also use JAVA on Ingres.

1. Security model – same
2. Scalability - same
3. Performance - same
hardly
hardly
hardly

And if you disagree feel free to point me to the benchmarks
that prove otherwise. Last time I looked at Ingres it had nothing
even remotely approaching FGA and FGAC capabilities.
4. Shared Everything Architecture - equivalent
Nonsense.
5. RAC - equivalent
Pure rubbish. You need to get back on your medication. ;-)
6. DataGuard - equivalent
Send a link.
7. RMAN - equivalent
Not in your wildest imagination.
28. TAF (transparent application failover) - equivalent
Sorry but my contacts at CA say no such technology exists.
8. User defined indexes - same
Provide a link or demonstrate the Ingres syntax.
9. User defined operators - same
Provide a link or demonstrate the Ingres syntax.
10. User defined locking - nice but never needed
Your loss.
11. Domain indexes - nice but never needed
Your loss. But then you don't have full-text indexing as in
Oracle Text and InterMedia so why have the domain indexes when
you don't have the technology to use them.
14. Function based indexes - nice but never needed
Your loss.
16. User defined data types - same
In your dreams.
17. Partitioning and Subpartitioning - same
Nonsense.
18. Global Temporary Tables - same
Nonsense.
19. External Tables - same
Nonsense.
20. Index Organized Tables - same
Nonsense.
21. Enterprise level support 7x24x365 - same
For free. You've really got to stop smokin' that stuff.
22. Books at Amazon.com
(Oracle 27,707 hits, DB2 1,955 hits, Ingres 0 hits if refering to
your product)
23. Jobs at Dice.com
(Oracle 8,097 jobs, DB2 1,779 jobs, Ingres 18 jobs)
24. Jobs at Monster.com
25. Jobs at Hotjobs.com

I agree that Oracle wins on the job front but that will change.
Would you rather keep your job and use Ingres ? or
keep Oracle and have your job outsourced to India ?
More jobs for MySQL than Ingres. More jobs for PostgreSQL than Ingres.
My jobs not in danger. And if it was there are 8,097 possibilities for
me. You get to choose from 18. And it is no secret I will get paid
tens of thousands of dollars more each year with Oracle or DB2 than you
will with you open source (because we couldn't sell it to anyone) database.
26. Packages - like programs ?
You made up your answers to previous questions when you had no idea what
the technology was so why ask a question now?
27. Native compilation into C of PL/SQL – never needed this
Apparently you've never built a real RDBMS application with tens of
thousands of simultaneous users runnign 7x24x365. Perhaps Ingres is the
right tool for you.
29. A prayer the product will still exist in 10 years. –
now that Ingres is Open Source it will still be here, why,

because its free

for the few things that Ingres does not have, Oracle is not worth the money ??

I know I have made my point !

Regards
Michael Newport


In a world with multiple open-source products only the best will
survive. A category in which, alas, Ingres is not a player. The only
reason Ingres is open-source is CA couldn't sell it. It has no real
community support and will perish. Well no doubt there is someone
out there using Advanced Revelation, RPG II, dBASE 4, etc. But they
really are not players and that is where Ingres is going. Even FoxPro,
as pathetic as Microsoft's marketing is, does better than Ingres.

--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #56
JS wrote:
DA Morgan <da******@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1098250365.710337@yasure>...
Rhino wrote:

Nobody's looking for a free ride. He/we just wanted to hear from people who
had used BOTH products to see what their pros and cons were. He/we also
wanted recommendations about good independent sources of reviews of these
products. That's exactly what I asked for.

Rhino


And exactly what you are not going to get as I haven't found a single
post from anyone that believes you. It is absolutely impossible for the
situation you presented to be true.

the true answer to the original question posted, which was, which db
is better, is: it's a tie, both products under the control of
experienced DBA('s) (and let's not forget the developer's) will do the
job for which they were designed.
Both products can scale indefinately, perhaps db2 has better locking
mechanism but overall you would have to slice the product very thinly
to declare a true winner. That said, db2 is cheaper, so in my mind you
get more bang for the buck with db2.


Another one that gave into the temptation to render an opinion when the
better man would have ignored the temptation. Repent. ;-)
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #57
michael newport wrote:
correction you thought that you had made your point...

You can also use JAVA on Ingres.
But nothing I've read says you can use Java IN Ingres. As in stored
procedures. But since Ingres is missing triggers, I suppose it doesn't
really matter. (Have to admit the rough counterpart - events - is neat. A
bit like database level triggers.)

1. Security model – same
Agreed, if you restrict yourself to simple grants. The Oracle security
model has a few additional things that are relevant and somewhat more
advanced than what the Ingres DBA manual indicates. At the tip of the
iceberg we see Virtual Private Database ...
2. Scalability - same
I can't seem to find any reference to scalability in the Ingres
documentation, or to system limitations. Nor did Google give any
references to big Ingres implementations.

Pointers would be appreciated to indicate that Ingres can handle 3000
concurrent users and 20TByte of raw data.
3. Performance - same
Checked TCP.org - no Ingres in sight. Any suggestions?
4. Shared Everything Architecture - equivalent
5. RAC - equivalent
So you are saying I can have 2 servers updating the same database
concurrently? Not SMP - separate machines. Updating the same table?

Couldn't find that in the docco.

What I did find, in the System Administrator's guide (pp11-1) is "The Ingres
High Availability Option is not scalable; that is, it does not provide
active instances on multiple nodes."
6. DataGuard - equivalent
I simply could not find the terms failover and failback in the docco.
Pointer?

The System admin manual does discuss a cluster-coordinated switch over,
using scripts. I assume you mean that. A bit like the pre-DataGuard 'Fail
Safe' back in 7.3.4 and 8.0.
7. RMAN - equivalent
Nothing I saw in the docco indicated that there is a facility to do the
backupand track the location of the pieces of the backups to provide
recommendations about which files (Journal or other) are required to
recover the database. Seems it's a manual effort. Perhaps I'm wrong?
28. TAF (transparent application failover) - equivalent
That's usually a function related to the cluster-cordinate failover. TAF
can provide transparent failover, with no need to restart the transaction.
8. User defined indexes - same
We store non-traditional datatypes (keyword, spatial data, images, music,
sheet music ....) and want to create a custom index? Oracle permits that -
you define the indexing mechanisms and tell Oracle to use that WHILE
keeping the base integrity of the index mechanism.

Ingres, being open source, allows you to totally rewrite indexing - so that
is the same. However, the engine doesn't then guarantee the integrity of
other kinds of indexes while one is putzing with the base indexing code. A
bit of a trade-off?
9. User defined operators - same
10. User defined locking - nice but never needed
Most developers depend on table serialization to ensure that operations
block appropriately. Even if that cuts scalability to 5-10 concurrent
users.

I prefer having some mechanism other than data locking to coordinate
concurrent operations.
11. Domain indexes - nice but never needed
Domains are basically previously undefined datatypes, somewhat like UDTs
(which are not limited to just "structures")

Why would anyone want to create any new data type and create an index type
that's relevant to the UDT? Much better to put that code in the
application than in the database! (Not)
12. Reverse-key indexes - same
Didn't see that in the online SQL manual as part of the CREATE INDEX
command. Have to take your word for it.
13. Compressed indexes - same
Yup. Finally one that seems similar. With the level of flexibility
described, possibly even better than Oracle's compression.
14. Function based indexes - nice but never needed


I think you missed the definition. In Oracle, the index is based on a user
defined _expression_ - so the ability to create an index on

(col1 * col2 + col3 )

is permitted. This are useful if the expression (using any function, even
user created functions) happens to occur frequently. Why look up the
pieces and assemble them later?

I could go on, but ....

My conclusion now is the same as I'd concluded that early 90's when a buddy
went to work for Ingres and encouraged a 'fair evaluation': Ingres is a
good database for reasonably plain, small, simple database usage with
nicely defined data buckets. For that it's probably one of the better
databases, but from what I can tell all effort goes into the application to
overcome the limitations.

However, my philosophy is 'give unto the database everything that can be
centralized'. Oracle's philosophy of additional tools, tricks and
simplifications help me. They will optimize and maintain those leaving me
free to worry about the application. And since I am willing to use them,
these items make the application's 3-year cost fairly reasonable.
I'm happy that Ingres is Open Source, even under CA's 'special' license. (I
hate it when the lawyers have to add value to a perfectly reasonable GPL.)

Of all the Open Source RDBMSs, I think Ingres will give Oracle the biggest
run for it's money if it survives. However I see MySQL, PostgreSQL - and
now Ingres - are competing and I think that will likely devolve to the old
unix SysV vs BSD core battles which helped no one (except Microsoft).

Since the questions I asked were mainly rhetorical, hopefully this will end
the "Ingres is good too!" contribution to the DB2 vs Oracle thread. <G>

/Hans
Jul 19 '05 #58
Serge Rielau <sr*****@ca.ibm.com> wrote in message news:<2t*************@uni-berlin.de>...
They believe by storing their data in tables and having some RI they are
using an RDBMS.

Ah!, but it's "got a SQL engine", you see? Gotta be good... :)

All they have done is found persistent storage for their data which then
is "processed" using nested cursors and procedural languages.
Bingo. They "encapsulate" that too, in "beans". It's
all soooo mnemonic, isn't it?

The _center piece_ of RDBMS: "relational alegbra" ends up as roadkill in
the ditch. 30 years of research and all there is to show for it is that
data is stored in tables.

"Algebra"? What, you now wanna mix religion into this?
Narh, let's dumb down the industry and its players:
best way of ensuring mediocrity gets a free ride,
masquerading as new "technology".
I should be fine with it.. it does sell hardware.


Of course it does. Wait until MySQL is the only
one used: that will open the floodgates.
Jul 19 '05 #59
*bigfatgrin*I see we agree :-)
Jul 19 '05 #60
Serge Rielau wrote:
*bigfatgrin*I see we agree :-)


Can I persuade you to leave just enough of the original post that it is
possible to maintain contex?

Thanks.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #61
the true answer is to expand the question,

Ingres does everything that DB2 / Oracle can, and Ingres is cheaper than both.

It is free.

You get more bang for your buck with Ingres.
Regards
Michael Newport
Jul 19 '05 #62
JS
mi************@yahoo.com (michael newport) wrote in message news:<63*************************@posting.google.c om>...
the true answer is to expand the question,

Ingres does everything that DB2 / Oracle can, and Ingres is cheaper than both.

It is free.

You get more bang for your buck with Ingres.
Regards
Michael Newport


well so is mysql, lets stick to 'mainstream' dbs that actually have a
measureable market share of some significance
Jul 19 '05 #63

"michael newport" <mi************@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:63*************************@posting.google.co m...
the true answer is to expand the question,

Ingres does everything that DB2 / Oracle can, and Ingres is cheaper than both.
It is free.

You get more bang for your buck with Ingres.
Regards
Michael Newport

You are full of it. Just to take a small example, where are the tpc
benchmarks?

Jim
Jul 19 '05 #64
michael newport wrote:
the true answer is to expand the question,

Ingres does everything that DB2 / Oracle can, and Ingres is cheaper than
both.
SNAP OUT OF IT MAN - seems you fell into a trance 10 years ago. Life has
moved forward, and so have the RDBMS capabilities.

You seem to have come to a conclusion some time ago and are possibly now
living a life of myths and workarounds. Programmers living in the age of
mythology cost more to projects than products do!

It is free.
Yes, the software is free. (But not GPL ... makes one wonder why!) The
software is also somewhat hidden - http://www.ingres.com is marketing only.
you need to go http://opensource.ca.com

You get more bang for your buck with Ingres.


Sadly it's behind the times. The price is right for it's capabilties, but
the cost of compensating for this older technology can be enormous. Even
CA as much as admitted that they couldn't make money on it without a major
overhaul when they made it FOSS. Coming from CA, that's heavy!

Commonly required capabilities like ROLLUP and GROUP BY GROUPING SETS, CUBE
and common-table-expressions (aka WITH clause) make a huge difference -
unless one prefers to spend money in development and maintenance.

-------

FWIW, anyone wishing to compare SQL capabilities from a developer's point of
view might want to look at the relevant SQL language docco for each (listed
alphabetically):

DB2:
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...manualsv8.html

Ingres:
http://opensource.ca.com/projects/ingres/documents

Oracle 9iR2:
http://www.oracle.com/pls/db92/db92....emark=homepage

--------

Now can we get back to the basic DB2 vs Oracle discussion?
/Hans
Jul 19 '05 #65
michael newport wrote:
the true answer is to expand the question,

Ingres does everything that DB2 / Oracle can,
Which is, without a question, an outright lie.
If you can't dwell within the land of the truthful
try saying nothing at all.

and Ingres is cheaper than both.

Also less expensive.
It is free.
So is trash but I don't go dumpster diving. Why
this crazed religious fervor? A desire to honor
those that died with valor?
You get more bang for your buck with Ingres.
A claim not supported by contact with reality.
What you get is a product that was so unimpressive
to the marketplace that its owner couldn't sell it
to anyone so they decided to just off-load it.
Regards
Michael Newport


But Michael, by all means, keep banging away at Ingres.
With any luck at all you'll last as long as those of my
colleagues that stayed with RPG II and ALGOL.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #66
why should we ?

unless of course you are willing to blindly shell out your companies money.
Jul 19 '05 #67
http://tpc.org/information/other/articles/TopTen.asp

The performance of databases is one issue, pricing is another. (Ingres
is FREE)

TPC results should not be used as a substitute for benchmarking of
one's own application if performance is a critical decision criteria
Michael
Jul 19 '05 #68
> SNAP OUT OF IT MAN - seems you fell into a trance 10 years ago. Life has
moved forward, and so have the RDBMS capabilities.
Which is why someone at CA (finally) made Ingres OpenSource.
An ex-Oracle person if my info. is correct.
How many more RDBMS capabilities do you need to do your job ?
You seem to have come to a conclusion some time ago and are possibly now
living a life of myths and workarounds. Programmers living in the age of
mythology cost more to projects than products do!
I am now (1 year) working with Oracle and my work involves doing the
same stuff that I did with Ingres (see previous post).

So why buy Oracle when Ingres is free.

It is free.


Yes, the software is free. (But not GPL ... makes one wonder why!) The
software is also somewhat hidden - http://www.ingres.com is marketing only.
you need to go http://opensource.ca.com

You get more bang for your buck with Ingres.


Sadly it's behind the times. The price is right for it's capabilties, but
the cost of compensating for this older technology can be enormous. Even
CA as much as admitted that they couldn't make money on it without a major
overhaul when they made it FOSS. Coming from CA, that's heavy!


Behind the times means what exactly ?
What compensation costs are you talking about exactly ?

The cost of buying Oracle IS enormous.
Ingres is FREE, and v3 is just being released.


Commonly required capabilities like ROLLUP and GROUP BY GROUPING SETS, CUBE
and common-table-expressions (aka WITH clause) make a huge difference -
unless one prefers to spend money in development and maintenance.
development and maintenance costs are human factors.
-------

FWIW, anyone wishing to compare SQL capabilities from a developer's point of
view might want to look at the relevant SQL language docco for each (listed
alphabetically):

DB2:
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data...manualsv8.html

Ingres:
http://opensource.ca.com/projects/ingres/documents

Oracle 9iR2:
http://www.oracle.com/pls/db92/db92....emark=homepage

--------

Now can we get back to the basic DB2 vs Oracle discussion?


doubtful.
Jul 19 '05 #69
Daniel,

what do you do at the University of Washington ?

nothing to do with education ?

Regards
Michael Newport
Jul 19 '05 #70
michael newport wrote:

development and maintenance costs are human factors.


Yes! And they are onging.

To reduce the total cost of a project over several years,

Reduce development and maintenance costs,
By writing and maintaining LESS code,
By having more capability in the vendor's product,
By using that capability.

/Hans
Jul 19 '05 #71
michael newport wrote:

So why buy Oracle when Ingres is free.


If you use Oracle like you use Ingres, you are absolutely correct.

The implication is that accounting and shareholders or stakeholders (or
wife) have not had a review of where time and money are going. Which is
more toward keeping old technology alive than improving the business.

Which makes me worry about management and the viability of the organization.
(Suggest you keep your resume polished ...)

Simplest example I can think of - Catalog the CD library & make it
accessible using browsers:

- Get Oracle DB (list price personal = US$400)
- Install DB (1 hour, 'cause I read the instructions)
- Install free HTML DB from companion disk (1 hour)
- use HTML DB to create tables, Web pages (1 hour)
for a tutorial, see http://www.oracle.com/technology/obe/index.html

Steps in Ingres? Unless something sigificant has changed in the past 7
years (last time I looked at it seriously) I suspect it takes a few
additional pieces of software, including PERL ('cause we want to stay
free), and a few additional hours.

Of course, you _could_ use Oracle the same way as Ingres and code the
solution in PERL or otherwise. But my wife prefers I send time with her
instead of the computer, and these days I prefer to listen to the CDs than
to code the catalog. (I listened when they said 'get a life' <g>)
/Hans
Jul 19 '05 #72
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.databases.oracle.server.]
On 2004-10-20, Hans Forbrich <ne*******@telus.net> wrote:
Mikito Harakiri wrote:
Hans Forbrich <ne*******@telus.net> wrote in message
news:<h3Scd.18205$cr4.15935@edtnps84>...
...functionality that I see required in many
apps such as: workflow, message queueing, replication, subqueries, direct
http request/response capability, security, backup/recovery, admin &
management tools, job scheduler (akin to cron, but inside the DB), DB
initiated callouts to OS shared libraries, DB initiated mail & page, DB
initiated TCP calls, and so on.
I alway wondered what is the true value of those bells and whistles.
Let's not forget that RDBMS essentially is a SQL execution engine, and
everything else should be judged from the perspective how well does it
fit into that primary purpose. Therefore, let's go through your list
itemized:


The value is simply in having a wheel around that doesn't need to be
re-invented and maintained.


No, it just sounds like suitable products need to be selected for
each of these tasks rather than just taking an Microsoft Office approach
to architecting the system.

No matter how much one explains these away with "isn't it just ...",
developers always seme to be reinventing these "justs". What you call
"bells and whistles" seem to be a base requirement in 90% of the projects
I've seen in the past 3 years - only the developer's don't realize the
bells are already there so they either build or buy a completely new set.

If that wasn't true, JMS, MQ Series Queuing and Workflow (oh, sorry - it's
WebSphere now), and the like would not have a reason for being.
These products have a reason for being because each product represents
a specialization in it's own right. If given the choice between a specialist
product such as MQ over some element of Oracle bundleware, I would be inclined
to go for the IBM product simply because I know that I can count on it to be
a discrete component that isn't going to be unecessarily tied to another
Oracle product.

Or are you saying - let's get back to commoditizing the SQL engine so we can
recover some of the revenue from these capabilities? Or continue stretching
project timelines to accomplish stuff that already exists? <g>

--
Negligence will never equal intent, no matter how you
attempt to distort reality to do so. This is what separates |||
the real butchers from average Joes (or Fritzes) caught up in / | \
events not in their control.

Jul 19 '05 #73
michael newport wrote:
http://tpc.org/information/other/articles/TopTen.asp

The performance of databases is one issue, pricing is another. (Ingres
is FREE)

TPC results should not be used as a substitute for benchmarking of
one's own application if performance is a critical decision criteria
Michael


And MySQL is the same price and far better with respect to performance,
scalability, and job potential.

Today, October 25th at http://www.dice.com
Oracle 7,926 jobs
Access 7,198 jobs
DB2 1,785 jobs
Sybase 1,389 jobs
COBOL 914 jobs
Informix 272 jobs
MySQL 247 jobs
FoxPro 58 jobs
PostgreSQL 31 jobs
Ingres 18 jobs
Paradox 10 jobs
dBASE 10 jobs
Advanced Rev. 3 jobs

So there you go ... a product so valuable that in the entire
U.S. there are almost twice as many jobs available as for those
whose expertise is in dBASE. Less than 2% of the job market of COBOL.
And fewer jobs offerings than the other "free" products. Where can I
sign up?

Even when it is free Ingres isn't worth anything.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #74
michael newport wrote:
I am now (1 year) working with Oracle and my work involves doing the
same stuff that I did with Ingres (see previous post).


That's not the fault of the product. That direct and proximate
responsibility falls on you for being a dinosaur. How much code have
you implemented with bulk binding? How much with the model clause?
How much with analytic functions? How many materialized views with
refresh logs?

Why not just admit that you have reached the point in your life
where you want technology to stop and let you keep doing what you
did in neolithic times.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #75
michael newport wrote:
Daniel,

what do you do at the University of Washington ?

nothing to do with education ?

Regards
Michael Newport


Teach databases something that might have interested you
once in your life.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #76

"michael newport" <mi************@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:63*************************@posting.google.co m...
http://tpc.org/information/other/articles/TopTen.asp

The performance of databases is one issue, pricing is another. (Ingres
is FREE)

TPC results should not be used as a substitute for benchmarking of
one's own application if performance is a critical decision criteria
Michael

If this is the same Ingres I used awhile ago I wouldn't touch it with a ten
foot pole even if you paid me. The concurrency model sucks, start a
transaction, insert a record, lock 95% of the table if it has a primary
key - because the page locks on the index locks most of the pages. NO ONE
ELSE COULD GET ANY WORK DONE, unless you threw out the transaction model and
went to auto commit. POS.
Jim
Jul 19 '05 #77
Jim,

you said this before, but I have not had the problem.

Regards
Michael Newport
Jul 19 '05 #78
Hans,
development and maintenance costs are human factors.
Yes! And they are onging.


If the analysis and /or programming is bad then these costs will be higher.
And do not forget, Oracle will charge you for a licence, this is ongoing.
To reduce the total cost of a project over several years,

Reduce development and maintenance costs, Human. By writing and maintaining LESS code, Human. By having more capability in the vendor's product, The database market is saturated with capable products.
What does RMAN do that the OS does not ?
By using that capability.

Human.
Jul 19 '05 #79
HansF <ne*******@telus.net> wrote in message news:<_68fd.2$df2.0@edtnps89>...
michael newport wrote:

So why buy Oracle when Ingres is free.
If you use Oracle like you use Ingres, you are absolutely correct.


Its just a database. You use it as you need to, to do your job.
See previous post for comparisons on how to do this.
The implication is that accounting and shareholders or stakeholders (or
wife) have not had a review of where time and money are going. Which is
more toward keeping old technology alive than improving the business.
Human.
Which makes me worry about management and the viability of the organization.
(Suggest you keep your resume polished ...)
Human.
Simplest example I can think of - Catalog the CD library & make it
accessible using browsers:

- Get Oracle DB (list price personal = US$400)
- Install DB (1 hour, 'cause I read the instructions)
- Install free HTML DB from companion disk (1 hour)
- use HTML DB to create tables, Web pages (1 hour)
for a tutorial, see http://www.oracle.com/technology/obe/index.html

Steps in Ingres? Unless something sigificant has changed in the past 7
years (last time I looked at it seriously) I suspect it takes a few
additional pieces of software, including PERL ('cause we want to stay
free), and a few additional hours.

Of course, you _could_ use Oracle the same way as Ingres and code the
solution in PERL or otherwise. But my wife prefers I send time with her
instead of the computer, and these days I prefer to listen to the CDs than
to code the catalog. (I listened when they said 'get a life' <g>)


Yes Ingres has changed significantly in the last 7 years.
It is also free.
That is $400 dollars saved.
Now imagine if you were a large company.
Jul 19 '05 #80
DA Morgan <da******@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1098752193.942650@yasure>...
michael newport wrote:
I am now (1 year) working with Oracle and my work involves doing the
same stuff that I did with Ingres (see previous post).
That's not the fault of the product. That direct and proximate
responsibility falls on you for being a dinosaur. How much code have
you implemented with bulk binding? How much with the model clause?
How much with analytic functions? How many materialized views with
refresh logs?


its answers the users needs.
and it was written by the dealine.
which meant my company got paid.
although some of this money was then sent to Oracle to pay for the
licence.
if we had used Ingres we could have done the same job for less, or
increased our profits.

Why not just admit that you have reached the point in your life
where you want technology to stop and let you keep doing what you
did in neolithic times.


If you are talking about Oracle report server, I will agree with you.
if you are talking about JAVA then you need to thank SUN not Oracle.
But technology for its own sake is a waste of money.
Jul 19 '05 #81
DA Morgan <da******@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1098752226.378168@yasure>...
michael newport wrote:
Daniel,

what do you do at the University of Washington ?

nothing to do with education ?

Regards
Michael Newport


Teach databases something that might have interested you
once in your life.


I am still interested, which is why we are having this discussion.
But rather than back a product because it has a particular brand,
I prefer a more realistic discussion of experience.

Have you ever used Ingres ?
Jul 19 '05 #82
michael newport wrote:
HansF <ne*******@telus.net> wrote in message
news:<_68fd.2$df2.0@edtnps89>...
michael newport wrote:
>
> So why buy Oracle when Ingres is free.


If you use Oracle like you use Ingres, you are absolutely correct.


Its just a database. You use it as you need to, to do your job.
See previous post for comparisons on how to do this.
The implication is that accounting and shareholders or stakeholders (or
wife) have not had a review of where time and money are going. Which is
more toward keeping old technology alive than improving the business.

Human.
Which makes me worry about management and the viability of the
organization. (Suggest you keep your resume polished ...)


Human.


What you consider Human, I consider time diverted _from_ Human activity such
as spending time with my wife and family. Instead, I'd be coding to
account for those pieces missing. After all, per your previous post it's
just a database, so we wouldn't want to get any benefit from that would we?

Been there, done that. Prefer the family.
Of course, you _could_ use Oracle the same way as Ingres and code the
solution in PERL or otherwise. But my wife prefers I send time with her
instead of the computer, and these days I prefer to listen to the CDs
than
to code the catalog. (I listened when they said 'get a life' <g>)


Yes Ingres has changed significantly in the last 7 years.
It is also free.
That is $400 dollars saved.
Now imagine if you were a large company.


Totally forgetting the cost of programming and maintenance again, aren't
you? Selective memory and bad logic don't make the added time and cost of
unnecessary development go away. And a big company needs to pay it's
people.

Remember that the run-on cost of development and maintenance kills many more
projects than the cost of purchased software or hardware. Which gets
people fired. Which, I guess is Human as well.

And yet, I do understand what you are saying. Having used both
OpenOffice.org and MS Office, I have never needed the full capability of MS
Word or Excel and have standardized my home and business on OO.org.
There's nothing missing, so I don't need to code for the stuff I'm missing.
In such an environment iff it's been properly thought out, go for 'good
enough'. (And remember MySQL & PostgreSQL!)

Note that I'm also a big believer in FOSS. All my personal and corp
machines, except one, are GNU/Linux based. Allows me to put the money and
effort where it belongs. Which I can only do by careful, not religious,
analysis.

And IMO, based on my analysis, Ingres is behind the times in the commercial
rdbms market, and (although it has a few decent capabilities) behind the
times in the FOSS market as well. My prediction is that the MySQL group
will look at the capabilities and legally subsume the good stuff, to add it
to the already superior product.
I suspect you are going to respond and, since I have a family to get back
to, that means you will get the last word. Make it a good one. Then you
can get back to your religion (and spend your time coding). <g>

/Hans
Jul 19 '05 #83
"Rhino" <rh****@NOSPAM.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<33*****************@news20.bellglobal.com>.. .
One of my friends, Scott, is a consultant who doesn't currently have
newsgroup access so I am asking these questions for him. I'll be telling him
how to monitor the answers via Google Newsgroup searches.

Scott has heard a lot of hype about DB2 and Oracle and is trying to
understand the pros and cons of each product. I'm quite familiar with DB2
but have never used Oracle so I can't make any meaningful comparisons for
him. He does not have a lot of database background but sometimes has to
choose or recommend a database to his clients.

Scott has enough life-experience to take the marketing information produced
by IBM and Oracle with a grain of salt and would like to hear from real
DBAs, especially ones who are fluent with both products, for their views on
two questions:

1. What are the pros and cons of the current releases of DB2 and Oracle?

2. What other sources of *independent* information are available to help
someone new to databases choose between DB2 and Oracle?

This is *not* a troll and we don't want to start a flame war! Scott just
want some honest facts to help him decide which product is best at which
jobs.

Hi,

without going into much religious talking, ask yourself:

How many OS versions of DB2 are on the market?
How many OS versions of Oracle?

For DB2 you find different databases for quite every platform (OS 390,
UNIX, AIX, mainframe...) - name it. For every problem they have a
database - incompatible between each other...
In Oracle you deal with the same architecture on every OS platform
they support.

Some of the things I like in Oracle

* a lot of features to select from (Oracles index types i.e.)
* the shared sql approach
* multi-versioning and read consistency implementation (SELECT without
being blocked by writes i.e.)

yk


at least, all databases return the data that you store,
Jul 19 '05 #84
Argh.... I finally break radio silence here....

Yukonkid wrote:
For DB2 you find different databases for quite every platform (OS 390,
UNIX, AIX, mainframe...) - name it. For every problem they have a
database - incompatible between each other...

OS390 < mainframe
AIX < Unix..
do you know what you are talking about?

There are three code bases:
DB2 for Linux, Unix, Windows
DB2 for z/OS
DB2 for AS/400

Oracle does not exist on AS/400 (through no fault of it's own...)
Oracle does virtually not exist on z/OS (low single digit market share,
could it be a separate codebase is required to be successful? ;-))

So if you want to deploy on i/Series or z/Series you look at DB2 and
ONLY DB2. No Oracle in the game.

If you want to deploy _anywhere_else_ DB2 competes with exactly _one_
codebase:
DB2 for Linux, Unix, Windows

Cheers
Serge
Jul 19 '05 #85
michael newport wrote:
And do not forget, Oracle will charge you for a licence, this is ongoing.


Aaah ... the ongoing license fee myth! (#83?) Sadly incorrect, just as your
other myths.
Oracle charges once for a perpetual license. An Oracle license allows you to
use it forever if you wish (which is why there are still sites using
Oracle6).
You can, if you wish, get support for a license. That is annual, and
provides unlimited support calls. Quite different from licensing.

<heavy sigh>
Jul 19 '05 #86
mi************@yahoo.com (michael newport) wrote in message news:<63*************************@posting.google.c om>...
DA Morgan <da******@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1098752193.942650@yasure>...
michael newport wrote:
I am now (1 year) working with Oracle and my work involves doing the
same stuff that I did with Ingres (see previous post).

Well, you need to get more experience with new stuff. Doing the same
thing over in a different environment should give you an increased
appreciation of what you are doing, and what you could be doing.

That's not the fault of the product. That direct and proximate
responsibility falls on you for being a dinosaur. How much code have
you implemented with bulk binding? How much with the model clause?
How much with analytic functions? How many materialized views with
refresh logs?
its answers the users needs.
and it was written by the dealine.
which meant my company got paid.
although some of this money was then sent to Oracle to pay for the
licence.
if we had used Ingres we could have done the same job for less, or
increased our profits.


I used to work for a vendor of a product that worked on multiple
databases, including Ingres. They dropped Ingres support due to lack
of interest from potential customers. Are you sure whoever paid your
company would have been interested with Ingres? Many products are
considered more desireable simply because they are more expensive.
Stupid, true, but the way of the world.

I do recall one banking customer had a problem because their currency
was so inflated Ingres couldn't handle the number of bits in the
numbers.
But technology for its own sake is a waste of money.


I would agree with that, except out of all the useless flak sometimes
a gem comes, and sometimes a critical mass is created to actually
improve things.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
Did I say critical mass?
http://www.nuclearspace.com.nyud.net...sview_FINX.htm
Jul 19 '05 #87
JEDIDIAH wrote:

These products have a reason for being because each product represents
a specialization in it's own right. If given the choice between a
specialist product such as MQ over some element of Oracle bundleware, I
would be inclined to go for the IBM product simply because I know that I
can count on it to be a discrete component that isn't going to be
unecessarily tied to another Oracle product.


LOL.

I have been called in after-the-fact in several situations that took that
attitude. (By the way - WebSphere has subsumed MQ Series. You were saying
about Bundleware?)

In each and every case, vendor's response was "well it wouldn't happen if
you used 'our' DB".

In each and every case, the solution was to take advantage of the selected
DB's capabilities instead of reinventing a bolt-on.

And in each and every case, the customer paid heavily for the software - in
one case they added $10M to the bill to have 'vendor X's queueing solution'
instead of using the freely supplied Oracle AQ (which did the same thing).

Smart - wot?

If YOUR organization has extra money to do these kinds of things, please let
me know. I have a few unnecessary solutions I could recommend.

'nuff said!
/Hans
Jul 19 '05 #88
"Rhino" <rh****@NOSPAM.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<33*****************@news20.bellglobal.com>.. .
One of my friends, Scott, is a consultant who doesn't currently have
newsgroup access so I am asking these questions for him. I'll be telling him
how to monitor the answers via Google Newsgroup searches.

Scott has heard a lot of hype about DB2 and Oracle and is trying to
understand the pros and cons of each product. I'm quite familiar with DB2
but have never used Oracle so I can't make any meaningful comparisons for
him. He does not have a lot of database background but sometimes has to
choose or recommend a database to his clients.

Scott has enough life-experience to take the marketing information produced
by IBM and Oracle with a grain of salt and would like to hear from real
DBAs, especially ones who are fluent with both products, for their views on
two questions:

1. What are the pros and cons of the current releases of DB2 and Oracle?

2. What other sources of *independent* information are available to help
someone new to databases choose between DB2 and Oracle?

This is *not* a troll and we don't want to start a flame war! Scott just
want some honest facts to help him decide which product is best at which
jobs.

Hi,

without going into much religious talking, ask yourself:

How many OS versions of DB2 are on the market?
How many OS versions of Oracle?

For DB2 you find different databases for quite every platform (OS 390,
UNIX, AIX, mainframe...) - name it. For every problem they have a
database - incompatible between each other...
In Oracle you deal with the same architecture on every OS platform
they support.

Some of the things I like in Oracle

* a lot of features to select from (Oracles index types i.e.)
* the shared sql approach
* multi-versioning and read consistency implementation (SELECT without
being blocked by writes i.e.)

yk


at least, all databases return the data that you store,
Jul 19 '05 #89
I have a free database that I can recommend.

Ingres.

Regards

Michael Newport
Jul 19 '05 #90
> Well, you need to get more experience with new stuff. Doing the same
thing over in a different environment should give you an increased
appreciation of what you are doing, and what you could be doing.
It did, and the similarities were all too obvious.

That's not the fault of the product. That direct and proximate
responsibility falls on you for being a dinosaur. How much code have
you implemented with bulk binding? How much with the model clause?
How much with analytic functions? How many materialized views with
refresh logs?


its answers the users needs.
and it was written by the dealine.
which meant my company got paid.
although some of this money was then sent to Oracle to pay for the
licence.
if we had used Ingres we could have done the same job for less, or
increased our profits.


I used to work for a vendor of a product that worked on multiple
databases, including Ingres. They dropped Ingres support due to lack
of interest from potential customers. Are you sure whoever paid your
company would have been interested with Ingres? Many products are
considered more desireable simply because they are more expensive.
Stupid, true, but the way of the world.


I agree that CA sales and marketing were bad. But Ingres the product is not.
CA also wasted time and money on speculative products like Jasmine and Opal.
Linux / Apache / PHP have taken off because they are reliable and OpenSource.
I predict the same for Ingres.
I do recall one banking customer had a problem because their currency
was so inflated Ingres couldn't handle the number of bits in the
numbers.
But technology for its own sake is a waste of money.


I would agree with that, except out of all the useless flak sometimes
a gem comes, and sometimes a critical mass is created to actually
improve things.

jg


Well here is a gem and its free.

Regards
Michael Newport
Jul 19 '05 #91
michael newport wrote:

Linux / Apache / PHP have taken off because they are reliable and OpenSource.
I predict the same for Ingres.


Linux, Apache and PHP are succesful because there is a strong developer
and user community. Ingres doesn't have this, and making something
OpenSource doesn't cause this community to automatically build.

Linux in particular benefited from the focus companies like Oracle, IBM
and others placed on it. The same level of focus is unlikely to happen
for Ingres.

Jul 19 '05 #92
> Linux, Apache and PHP are succesful because there is a strong developer
and user community. Ingres doesn't have this, and making something
OpenSource doesn't cause this community to automatically build.
Linux, Apache and PHP did not start off successful. They grew.

Ingres has existed for a long time, the base IS there
comp.databases.ingres
Linux in particular benefited from the focus companies like Oracle, IBM
and others placed on it. The same level of focus is unlikely to happen
for Ingres.


Companies focus on Linux because it is free. A huge advantage.

Oh and by the way Ingres is also free.
Jul 19 '05 #93
> How many OS versions of DB2 are on the market?
How many OS versions of Oracle?
How many OS versions of Ingres ?
For DB2 you find different databases for quite every platform (OS 390,
UNIX, AIX, mainframe...) - name it. For every problem they have a
database - incompatible between each other...
In Oracle you deal with the same architecture on every OS platform
they support.
In Ingres you deal with the same architecture on every OS platform
they support.
Some of the things I like in Oracle

* a lot of features to select from (Oracles index types i.e.)
* the shared sql approach
* multi-versioning and read consistency implementation (SELECT without
being blocked by writes i.e.)
you would like Ingres then.
at least, all databases return the data that you store,


depends on the human factor.
Jul 19 '05 #94
Michael,

This thread is now very much off topic.
Comparison between Oracle and Ingres should be in these respective
newsgroups if you insist on having these debates.
I don't see where comp.databases.ibm-db2 is relevant here.

Cheers
Serge
Jul 19 '05 #95
michael newport wrote:
Well, you need to get more experience with new stuff. Doing the same
thing over in a different environment should give you an increased
appreciation of what you are doing, and what you could be doing.

It did, and the similarities were all too obvious.

That's not the fault of the product. That direct and proximate
responsibility falls on you for being a dinosaur. How much code have
you implemented with bulk binding? How much with the model clause?
How much with analytic functions? How many materialized views with
refresh logs?

its answers the users needs.
and it was written by the dealine.
which meant my company got paid.
although some of this money was then sent to Oracle to pay for the
licence.
if we had used Ingres we could have done the same job for less, or
increased our profits.


I used to work for a vendor of a product that worked on multiple
databases, including Ingres. They dropped Ingres support due to lack
of interest from potential customers. Are you sure whoever paid your
company would have been interested with Ingres? Many products are
considered more desireable simply because they are more expensive.
Stupid, true, but the way of the world.

I agree that CA sales and marketing were bad. But Ingres the product is not.
CA also wasted time and money on speculative products like Jasmine and Opal.
Linux / Apache / PHP have taken off because they are reliable and OpenSource.
I predict the same for Ingres.

I would be curious what the advantages of Ingres might be over other free
(depending on exact usage) dbms's such as postgreSQL and MySQL. I know
that Ingres has been around since even before Oracle existed (late
1970s?). I suppose postgreSQL is a descendant of Ingres.

For desktop use, it probably matters little, though after fussing around
with a bunch of them, I chose to pay IBM for their DB2 UDB because it just
plain worked better and they seemed to follow standards (such as for
Embedded SQL) better than did Informix or postgreSQL did at the time I
tried them (mid to late 1990s).

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 13:05:00 up 4 days, 14:57, 3 users, load average: 5.37, 5.04, 4.59

Jul 19 '05 #96
Mark Townsend <ma***********@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<41**************@comcast.net>...
michael newport wrote:

Linux / Apache / PHP have taken off because they are reliable and OpenSource.
I predict the same for Ingres.
>
Linux, Apache and PHP are succesful because there is a strong developer
and user community. Ingres doesn't have this, and making something
OpenSource doesn't cause this community to automatically build.


That's an interesting perspective, Mark. I agree for linux (certainly
my own interest in linux stemmed from getting away from windows
together with unix bigotry - and now that new versions don't run
[without a whole lot of work] on any of my half-dozen computers and
are suffering from bloatware, I'm not so interested for my own sake).

Apache and PHP, on the other hand, I would argue, benefitted from
having a "killer app," and some cluelessness from MS. Of course, now
that I've argued it, I have to say linux also benefitted from the
same, but subsequent to the developer interest. They all started
because of the strong developer community, but success came later.
For Apache, only a year later, taking over the high growth market that
NCSA created, but later nonetheless.

Linux in particular benefited from the focus companies like Oracle, IBM
and others placed on it. The same level of focus is unlikely to happen
for Ingres.


And so my interest in linux is now professional, rather than personal.
This is a good thing. But linux is only just now becoming successful
in the db world. Some people might still consider it the next big
thing. It's here, bleeding edge places are using it, but
mainstream... maybe all those hp/solaris job ads reflect the
forward-looking people leaving :-)

From my perspective, the only thing that can save Ingres is a killer
app. And I think anyone writing anything new would choose something
else (or db independence), unless some underemployed Ingres people
brainstormed and got lucky.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
I'll gladly agree to take only 25%.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...b27lerach.html
Jul 19 '05 #97
michael newport wrote:
Hans,
development and maintenance costs are human factors.


Yes! And they are onging.

If the analysis and /or programming is bad then these costs will be higher.
And do not forget, Oracle will charge you for a licence, this is ongoing.
To reduce the total cost of a project over several years,

Reduce development and maintenance costs,


Human.
By writing and maintaining LESS code,


Human.
By having more capability in the vendor's product,


The database market is saturated with capable products.
What does RMAN do that the OS does not ?

By using that capability.


Human.


Many many things so rather than spouting off about things of which
you have no knowledge why don't you invest some effort and learn
about them. All you've done so far is advertise your lack of knowledge
about both Oracle and DB2.

But for starters ... incremental backup of changed blocks.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #98
michael newport wrote:
So why buy Oracle when Ingres is free.
If you use Oracle like you use Ingres, you are absolutely correct.


Its just a database. You use it as you need to, to do your job.
See previous post for comparisons on how to do this.


Having stuck your foot into your mouth I was assuming you wouldn't
follow up by trying to swallow it. You claim to be a database
developer but your posts read like a first year Java newbie.
Yes Ingres has changed significantly in the last 7 years.
It is also free.
That is $400 dollars saved.
Now imagine if you were a large company.


$400 is less than we spend in a week for free softdrinks for our
employees. Get a life.

--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #99
michael newport wrote:
DA Morgan <da******@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1098752193.942650@yasure>...
michael newport wrote:

I am now (1 year) working with Oracle and my work involves doing the
same stuff that I did with Ingres (see previous post).


That's not the fault of the product. That direct and proximate
responsibility falls on you for being a dinosaur. How much code have
you implemented with bulk binding? How much with the model clause?
How much with analytic functions? How many materialized views with
refresh logs?

its answers the users needs.
and it was written by the dealine.
which meant my company got paid.
although some of this money was then sent to Oracle to pay for the
licence.
if we had used Ingres we could have done the same job for less, or
increased our profits.


Had you used Ingres the customer likely would have hired a firm that
knew how to work in a real database. Your firm would have been paid $0
and you'd be unemployed.
Why not just admit that you have reached the point in your life
where you want technology to stop and let you keep doing what you
did in neolithic times.


If you are talking about Oracle report server, I will agree with you.
if you are talking about JAVA then you need to thank SUN not Oracle.
But technology for its own sake is a waste of money.


Not once in this entire thread have Oracle Report Server (it doesn't
even exist any more) or JAVA been part of any post. Don't try to change
the subject. That is a activity best left to small children.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
da******@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Jul 19 '05 #100

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

Similar topics

2
by: Dave Brueck | last post by:
Below is some information I collected from a *small* project in which I wrote a Python version of a Java application. I share this info only as a data point (rather than trying to say this data...
133
by: jonathan | last post by:
hey all, I realize that this question might pop up from time to time, but I haven't seen it a while and things might of changed, so - Right now (July 2004) how does mysql stand up in...
137
by: Rhino | last post by:
One of my friends, Scott, is a consultant who doesn't currently have newsgroup access so I am asking these questions for him. I'll be telling him how to monitor the answers via Google Newsgroup...
0
by: ryjfgjl | last post by:
ExcelToDatabase: batch import excel into database automatically...
0
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 6 Mar 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:15 (7.15PM). In this month's session, we are pleased to welcome back...
0
by: jfyes | last post by:
As a hardware engineer, after seeing that CEIWEI recently released a new tool for Modbus RTU Over TCP/UDP filtering and monitoring, I actively went to its official website to take a look. It turned...
0
by: ArrayDB | last post by:
The error message I've encountered is; ERROR:root:Error generating model response: exception: access violation writing 0x0000000000005140, which seems to be indicative of an access violation...
1
by: PapaRatzi | last post by:
Hello, I am teaching myself MS Access forms design and Visual Basic. I've created a table to capture a list of Top 30 singles and forms to capture new entries. The final step is a form (unbound)...
1
by: CloudSolutions | last post by:
Introduction: For many beginners and individual users, requiring a credit card and email registration may pose a barrier when starting to use cloud servers. However, some cloud server providers now...
1
by: Defcon1945 | last post by:
I'm trying to learn Python using Pycharm but import shutil doesn't work
1
by: Shællîpôpï 09 | last post by:
If u are using a keypad phone, how do u turn on JavaScript, to access features like WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram....
0
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 3 Apr 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM). In this session, we are pleased to welcome former...

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.