Re: Whatcha' wanta have?????

"Data Goob" <datagoob@hotmail.com> wrote > A small correction on DB2 'fragmentation': > > DB2 does partitioning, which is functionally equivalent to > "fragmentation" in Informix. The interesting thing is that > you can get partitioned clustering out-of-the-box with DB2, > you can't get that with Informix, unless you buy XPS, and god > only knows if XPS is even being used anymore. Of course I'm > talking about DB2 EEE, not workgroup. Partitioning in DB2 is > also somewhat advanced in that it is not just disk partitioning, > but also instance partitioning, something close to what XPS > can do with virtual co-servers on one platform. The difference > is that the partitioning on DB2 is still within one instance, > it's not several instances as in XPS if you set up several > coservers on one platform. XPS is somewhat primitive compared > to DB2 in that regard ( or maybe 'simple' is a better word ). > Pity XPS never made it into the mainstream, a classic case of > sitting on your assets. > > With DB2 you get today what "arrowhead" was supposed to be, you > don't have to wait for it. You also get table-level memory > management with DB2, with Informix you do not, you get global > instance-wide memory and a handful of other settings and that's > it. > > Regarding MS-SQL, it only runs on Windows, so whatever platform > it runs on, typically Intel x86, it will be limited by whatever > limitation comes with 32-bit x86. Pages are typically 4K in > MS-SQL, but can be changed--and I don't recall off the top of > my head what circumstances or limitations there are with that. lemme make a guess. You are Tim Scheafer :-)

"rkusenet" <rkusenet@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<2l3o8bF8dsu8U1@uni-berlin.de>... > "Data Goob" <datagoob@hotmail.com> wrote > > > A small correction on DB2 'fragmentation': > > > > DB2 does partitioning, which is functionally equivalent to > > "fragmentation" in Informix. The interesting thing is that > > you can get partitioned clustering out-of-the-box with DB2, > > you can't get that with Informix, unless you buy XPS, and god > > only knows if XPS is even being used anymore. Of course I'm > > talking about DB2 EEE, not workgroup. Partitioning in DB2 is > > also somewhat advanced in that it is not just disk partitioning, > > but also instance partitioning, something close to what XPS > > can do with virtual co-servers on one platform. The difference > > is that the partitioning on DB2 is still within one instance, > > it's not several instances as in XPS if you set up several > > coservers on one platform. XPS is somewhat primitive compared > > to DB2 in that regard ( or maybe 'simple' is a better word ). > > Pity XPS never made it into the mainstream, a classic case of > > sitting on your assets. > > > > With DB2 you get today what "arrowhead" was supposed to be, you > > don't have to wait for it. You also get table-level memory > > management with DB2, with Informix you do not, you get global > > instance-wide memory and a handful of other settings and that's > > it. > > > > Regarding MS-SQL, it only runs on Windows, so whatever platform > > it runs on, typically Intel x86, it will be limited by whatever > > limitation comes with 32-bit x86. Pages are typically 4K in > > MS-SQL, but can be changed--and I don't recall off the top of > > my head what circumstances or limitations there are with that. > > lemme make a guess. You are Tim Scheafer :-) are you still getting an error when you try to update a row in such a way that it has to move to another partition??? is db2cv still trying to redistribute all data when adding a container to a tablespace?? talking about primitive... and i hate to say this one instance of xps can exist out of a number of coservers. Superboer.