Re: No future for DB2

> Recoveries? Yeah, I seldom need to recover databases. But I think > that a primary responsibility of a dba is to be able to restore a > database. :-) So, I'm a big believer to running backup/restore drills > if necessary to develop that skill. > How could running recovery drills be easier in DB2 than in Oracle? >> This is a pure assumption. Apparently they have not been Oracle trained. > True. Nor had they been db2-trained prior to starting this project. > But I've got the same amount of experience with both databases, and > have built similar data warehouse projects on both. Both are great for > warehousing, with each having cool strengths. Oracle's partition > management and third-party support is fantastic. DB2's MDC (like > partitioning) is both fantastic and included in the base product. And > supporting and explaining db2 is much easier in my experience. > If I were to compare Oracle and DB2, ease of use or support would be the last thing come to mind. The overall difference is so minor. Anybody with slightly different experience would disagree with you. No, partitioning is not included in DB2 Workgroup Edition. You can't even do simple replications in DB2 without purchasing a separate product.

Bob Jones wrote: >>Recoveries? Yeah, I seldom need to recover databases. But I think >>that a primary responsibility of a dba is to be able to restore a >>database. :-) So, I'm a big believer to running backup/restore drills >>if necessary to develop that skill. >> > > > How could running recovery drills be easier in DB2 than in Oracle? I found the idea that backup/recovery was an issue fascinating. When I set up a server I create a backup routine, test it, and then forget it except when configuration changes are made or to perform routine verification that it still works. If it is something someone has to think about daily they did a lousy job of it. I must confess, though, that these days if my system did anything other than melt down I would NEVER use a backup to recover. In Oracle I'd look at flashback table, flashback query, flashback database, lots of simple effective solutions before I ever went calling for the off-site backup tapes. I think some of these people are still operating the way they did in the 1980s. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

Bob Jones wrote: > > No, partitioning is not included in DB2 Workgroup Edition. You can't even do > simple replications in DB2 without purchasing a separate product. > We have been discussing here primarily DB2 for Linux/UNIX/Windows right? This is not true. Replication is included free-of-charge with DB2 WE and with DB2 ESE. Larry E.

> How could running recovery drills be easier in DB2 than in Oracle? db2 has less moving parts to worry about > If I were to compare Oracle and DB2, ease of use or support would be the > last thing come to mind. The overall difference is so minor. Anybody with > slightly different experience would disagree with you. once again, less moving parts. less stuff to manage. of course, sometimes those extra parts given oracle flexibility that's useful. at least theoretically that's the case. In my opion, it's also much less forgiving - in which every single configuration change is preceeded with a backup, and even shutting down the database can be a pain. That's something that just doesn't seem common in the db2 world - to do backups before every change. Talking about 9i here and v8 btw. > No, partitioning is not included in DB2 Workgroup Edition. You can't even do > simple replications in DB2 without purchasing a separate product. Last I checked, Workgroup Server Edition (WSE) costs $999 + $250 / user in the concurrent or registered model. It also supports: - replication - multi-dimensional clustering (very similar to oracle partitioning) - 64-bit instances - up to 4 cpus This means you could *easily* build a 2 TB data warehouse on db2 for under $1500 in licensing costs. And yeah, mdc is different than oracle's partitioning - lacks oracle's nice partition management. But is very easy to work with, and is great for performance. And of course you could also use union-all views - which are more similar to Oracle's partitioning. This capable is also *free*, and can be combined with mdc if you wish. And then if you want to take the next step and move into DPF (spanning multiple servers), either of these techniques can be *combined* with that partitioning strategy. And how much does partitioning cost / server for oracle? $10,000? so, what are we looking at here? $1500 for db2 vs $40,000 just for oracle partitioning - not even including the base product? Note that buying just the vanilla database doesn't get you all the data warehousing bells and whistles that oracle & db2 can offer. Then again, those features are expensive and of debatable value anyway.

>> >> No, partitioning is not included in DB2 Workgroup Edition. You can't even >> do simple replications in DB2 without purchasing a separate product. >> > > We have been discussing here primarily DB2 for Linux/UNIX/Windows right? > This is not true. Replication is included free-of-charge with DB2 WE and > with DB2 ESE. > I am talking about replicating data from DB2 on z to DB2 on LUW.

Buck Nuggets wrote: > db2 has less moving parts to worry about Oracle has one ... RMAN ... how many less does DB2 have? -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

"DA Morgan" <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote in message news:1122836023.709609@yasure... > Oracle has one ... RMAN ... how many less does DB2 have? > > Daniel A. Morgan I think he is talking about the Oracle control files, which are optionally backed up. RMAN is a big improvement for backups compared to what was previously required in Oracle, but amazingly not everyone uses it. DB2 just has one command, the backup command. All of the control files needed to restore a database are included. If doing an online backup, you can also include the log files that were active during the online backup in the backup image.

Mark A wrote: > "DA Morgan" <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote in message > news:1122836023.709609@yasure... > >>Oracle has one ... RMAN ... how many less does DB2 have? >> >>Daniel A. Morgan > > > I think he is talking about the Oracle control files, which are optionally > backed up. RMAN is a big improvement for backups compared to what was > previously required in Oracle, but amazingly not everyone uses it. > > DB2 just has one command, the backup command. All of the control files > needed to restore a database are included. If doing an online backup, you > can also include the log files that were active during the online backup in > the backup image. I think he is talking about dinosaurs that still use command line scripts to back up Oracle and thus have to concern themselves with control files, log files, data files, temp files, etc. But lets acknowledge that these DBAs are dinosaurs using techniques no longer reflecting best practice in the product. Sole exception from my comment ... those poor souls precluded from upgrading to 9i or above by management short-sightedness. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

"DA Morgan" <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote in message news:1122837601.611024@yasure... > I think he is talking about dinosaurs that still use command line > scripts to back up Oracle and thus have to concern themselves with > control files, log files, data files, temp files, etc. But lets > acknowledge that these DBAs are dinosaurs using techniques no longer > reflecting best practice in the product. > > Sole exception from my comment ... those poor souls precluded from > upgrading to 9i or above by management short-sightedness. > -- > Daniel A. Morgan I have seen 9i and 10g shops that don't use RMAN.

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 13:27:05 -0600, Mark A interested us by writing: > > I have seen 9i and 10g shops that don't use RMAN. So have I. Generally for one of two reasons: 1) As a result of their experience with RMAN in Oracle8. (And, of course, since it was not ready for prime time then, obviously it can't have improved in the mean time. <g>) 2) They have their own way of doing backups, and are happy to pay money, either to a third party vendor or to their development staff, to keep it going. (Unfortunately in my experience, often without a restore mechanism.) Funny that companies go out of their way to get the lastest verion of some graphically-based OSs which provide less-than minimal incremental benefit to the business (except perhaps more efficient ways of obtaining RSIs) but refuse to use, or even to consider, that which is available in Oracle "because of standards". C'est la vie. -- Hans Forbrich Canada-wide Oracle training and consulting mailto: Fuzzy.GreyBeard_at_gmail.com *** I no longer assist with top-posted newsgroup queries ***

>> How could running recovery drills be easier in DB2 than in Oracle? > > db2 has less moving parts to worry about > Can you be more specific on what "moving parts" are? >> If I were to compare Oracle and DB2, ease of use or support would be the >> last thing come to mind. The overall difference is so minor. Anybody with >> slightly different experience would disagree with you. > > once again, less moving parts. less stuff to manage. of course, > sometimes those extra parts given oracle flexibility that's useful. at > least theoretically that's the case. In my opion, it's also much less > forgiving - in which every single configuration change is preceeded > with a backup, and even shutting down the database can be a pain. > That's something that just doesn't seem common in the db2 world - to do > backups before every change. Talking about 9i here and v8 btw. > None of these makes any sense to me. Doing a backup before every configuration change is a choice, an unusual one I might add, not a requirement. That's not even something specific to Oracle. Many things can be a pain if not done correctly, not just a simple task like shutting down a database. >> No, partitioning is not included in DB2 Workgroup Edition. You can't even >> do >> simple replications in DB2 without purchasing a separate product. > > Last I checked, Workgroup Server Edition (WSE) costs $999 + $250 / user > in the concurrent or registered model. It also supports: > - replication > - multi-dimensional clustering (very similar to oracle partitioning) > - 64-bit instances > - up to 4 cpus > This means you could *easily* build a 2 TB data warehouse on db2 for > under $1500 in licensing costs. And yeah, mdc is different than > oracle's partitioning - lacks oracle's nice partition management. But > is very easy to work with, and is great for performance. And of course > you could also use union-all views - which are more similar to Oracle's > partitioning. This capable is also *free*, and can be combined with > mdc if you wish. And then if you want to take the next step and move > into DPF (spanning multiple servers), either of these techniques can be > *combined* with that partitioning strategy. > MDC and database paritioning are two different things, even in DB2 terms. DPF (Database Partitioning Feature) is only available in DB2 ESE, even then it still has to be licensed separately. > And how much does partitioning cost / server for oracle? $10,000? so, > what are we looking at here? $1500 for db2 vs $40,000 just for oracle > partitioning - not even including the base product? > How much does DB2 paritioning feature cost per CPU? And don't forget you can also use union all views in Oracle without the paritioning feature, if you think one can replace the other.

Mark A wrote: > "DA Morgan" <damorgan@psoug.org> wrote in message > news:1122837601.611024@yasure... > >>I think he is talking about dinosaurs that still use command line >>scripts to back up Oracle and thus have to concern themselves with >>control files, log files, data files, temp files, etc. But lets >>acknowledge that these DBAs are dinosaurs using techniques no longer >>reflecting best practice in the product. >> >>Sole exception from my comment ... those poor souls precluded from >>upgrading to 9i or above by management short-sightedness. >>-- >>Daniel A. Morgan > > > I have seen 9i and 10g shops that don't use RMAN. I have seen people drinking and driving. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

And let me guess ... to replicate from Oracle on z/OS to a database on LUW is free? Larry E. Bob Jones wrote: >>>No, partitioning is not included in DB2 Workgroup Edition. You can't even >>>do simple replications in DB2 without purchasing a separate product. >>> >> >>We have been discussing here primarily DB2 for Linux/UNIX/Windows right? >>This is not true. Replication is included free-of-charge with DB2 WE and >>with DB2 ESE. >> > > > I am talking about replicating data from DB2 on z to DB2 on LUW. > >

Now, is z/OS Oracle's product or is it as open as UNIX, or even Windows? Besides z/OS is not even a primary platform for Oracle, but it is for DB2. > And let me guess ... to replicate from Oracle on z/OS to a database on LUW > is free? > > Larry E. > > Bob Jones wrote: >>>>No, partitioning is not included in DB2 Workgroup Edition. You can't >>>>even do simple replications in DB2 without purchasing a separate >>>>product. >>>> >>> >>>We have been discussing here primarily DB2 for Linux/UNIX/Windows right? >>>This is not true. Replication is included free-of-charge with DB2 WE and >>>with DB2 ESE. >>> >> >> >> I am talking about replicating data from DB2 on z to DB2 on LUW.

That's not the point. One of your complaints about DB2 was that Replication costs $. It doesn't ... only on z/OS and i-series. So does Oracle apparently. Larry E. Bob Jones wrote: > Now, is z/OS Oracle's product or is it as open as UNIX, or even Windows? > Besides z/OS is not even a primary platform for Oracle, but it is for DB2. > > >>And let me guess ... to replicate from Oracle on z/OS to a database on LUW >>is free? >> >>Larry E. >> >>Bob Jones wrote: >> >>>>>No, partitioning is not included in DB2 Workgroup Edition. You can't >>>>>even do simple replications in DB2 without purchasing a separate >>>>>product. >>>>> >>>> >>>>We have been discussing here primarily DB2 for Linux/UNIX/Windows right? >>>>This is not true. Replication is included free-of-charge with DB2 WE and >>>>with DB2 ESE. >>>> >>> >>> >>>I am talking about replicating data from DB2 on z to DB2 on LUW. > > >

Larry wrote: > That's not the point. One of your complaints about DB2 was that > Replication costs $. It doesn't ... only on z/OS and i-series. So does > Oracle apparently. > > Larry E. 1. Please don't top post 2. So does Oracle apparently what? Charge for replication services? No. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

HansF wrote: > So have I. Generally for one of two reasons: > > 1) As a result of their experience with RMAN in Oracle8. (And, of course, > since it was not ready for prime time then, obviously it can't have > improved in the mean time. <g>) > > 2) They have their own way of doing backups, and are happy to pay money, > either to a third party vendor or to their development staff, to keep it > going. (Unfortunately in my experience, often without a restore mechanism.) > I've seen a third-one: they run Standard Edition and RMAN's functionality on that one is brain-damageed and they can't take full advantage of the product. So they stick to the good old scripts that do exactly the same.

> That's not the point. One of your complaints about DB2 was that > Replication costs $. It doesn't ... only on z/OS and i-series. So does > Oracle apparently. > > Larry E. > > Bob Jones wrote: >> Now, is z/OS Oracle's product or is it as open as UNIX, or even Windows? >> Besides z/OS is not even a primary platform for Oracle, but it is for >> DB2. >> >> >>>And let me guess ... to replicate from Oracle on z/OS to a database on >>>LUW is free? >>> >>>Larry E. >>> >>>Bob Jones wrote: >>> >>>>>>No, partitioning is not included in DB2 Workgroup Edition. You can't >>>>>>even do simple replications in DB2 without purchasing a separate >>>>>>product. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>We have been discussing here primarily DB2 for Linux/UNIX/Windows >>>>>right? This is not true. Replication is included free-of-charge with >>>>>DB2 WE and with DB2 ESE. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>I am talking about replicating data from DB2 on z to DB2 on LUW. >> >> So DB2 on z/OS or iSeries is not DB2? I don't know where you read Oracle charges simple replication as a separate product on any platform. The fact that IBM is charging customers for simple replication with DB2 running on its own platforms is exactly my complain.

Between the mainframe and Linux/UNIX/Windows Daniel? Larry E. DA Morgan wrote: > Larry wrote: > >> That's not the point. One of your complaints about DB2 was that >> Replication costs $. It doesn't ... only on z/OS and i-series. So does >> Oracle apparently. >> >> Larry E. > > > 1. Please don't top post > 2. So does Oracle apparently what? > > Charge for replication services? No.