Ok, call me silly...

Hey! I really am an easy going guy. We've all heard the rumors of an IDS TPC-E benchmark is somewhere going to happen some day. After all, IDS *is* IBM's go to database for transactions! Back a couple of months ago. (Ok, like around January) IBM published a TPC-C benchmark using DB2 9.5. Serge pointed out that IBM *had* everything set up for a DB2 benchmark, so it was 'easier' to publish a TPC-C benchmark using DB2 than trying to set up an IDS benchmark. IDS, you know, IBM's OLTP database. Well *everyone* knows that TPC-C is dead and that the new benchmark is 'TPC-E'. Right? Hmmm. Why doesn't someone tell both HP and IBM? After IBM's benchmark, HP ran theirs. Of course, IBM retaliates with yet another benchmark released today. You can read about it here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/11/ibm_power6_tpcc/ The sad truth is that maybe there is a TPC-E benchmark on the way. We may even see it someday. However, the perception that is getting re-enforced is that IBM is paying "lip service" to the IDS crowd. Sales critter will follow the "lead with DB2, then if all else fails, mention IDS" from Janet's days. And its the perception that hurts all of us. But hey! What do I know? I'm being paid to save the world from gits who blindly follow their GPS systems and drive in to people's homes, ponds, and lakes. ;-) -G _________________________________________________________________ Now you can invite friends from Facebook and other groups to join you on Windows Live™ Messenger. Add now. https://www.invite2messenger.net/im/?source=TXT_EML_WLH_AddNow_Now

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > Hey! > > I really am an easy going guy. > > We've all heard the rumors of an IDS TPC-E benchmark is somewhere going > to happen some day. > > After all, IDS *is* IBM's go to database for transactions! > > Back a couple of months ago. (Ok, like around January) > IBM published a TPC-C benchmark using DB2 9.5. > > Serge pointed out that IBM *had* everything set up for a DB2 benchmark, > so it was 'easier' to publish a TPC-C benchmark using DB2 than trying to > set up an IDS benchmark. IDS, you know, IBM's OLTP database. > > Well *everyone* knows that TPC-C is dead and that the new benchmark is > 'TPC-E'. Right? > Hmmm. Why doesn't someone tell both HP and IBM? > After IBM's benchmark, HP ran theirs. > Of course, IBM retaliates with yet another benchmark released today. > You can read about it here: > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/11/ibm_power6_tpcc/ > > The sad truth is that maybe there is a TPC-E benchmark on the way. We > may even see it someday. However, the perception that is getting > re-enforced is that IBM is paying "lip service" to the IDS crowd. Sales > critter will follow the "lead with DB2, then if all else fails, mention > IDS" from Janet's days. > > And its the perception that hurts all of us. > > But hey! What do I know? > I'm being paid to save the world from gits who blindly follow their GPS > systems and drive in to people's homes, ponds, and lakes. ;-) > > -G > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Now you can invite friends from Facebook and other groups to join you on > Windows Live' Messenger. Add them now! > <https://www.invite2messenger.net/im/?source=TXT_EML_WLH_AddNow_Now>; Not to contradict you, but you above all should note two points: - This is a hardware war... It has nothing to do with Databases. Using TPC-E or TPC-C is irrelevant. The question is: How fast is your preferred chip? or... How unrealistic would you build your system? - IBM hardware and IBM software are two completely different structures that operate almost as two separate companies. This has advantages and disadvantages , for IBM, for the customers and for the competitors, and I wouldn't want to dig into it. Regards.

Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > > However, the perception that is getting > re-enforced is that IBM is paying "lip service" to the IDS crowd. To quote Bart Simpson ... "No duh!" Of course I sounds better when you say than when I do. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

Silly! You should really give up. I did. Oracle side of the house pays more for doing less with less and more with more. Less quality and more of it. More resources and less performance. You can argue and sing Informix's praises till the cows come home and it won't change your personal economics, much less, Informix is nothing about nothing, a complete and utter waste of time. I think the product is great and has a lot of promise, but it's not going anywhere, so why on earth do you waste your time with it beyond a casual, occasional glance at it. IBM has seen fit to shove it in the back, no way you can win with a strategy like that. Informix :: The Database With Invisibility Built In Oracle market share exploded last year, it will continue to entrench itself and consume the market. It raises all the boats in harbor, so why not move on. Informix may someday be a player, but it's virtually invisible. Oracle applications are on fire, creating so much work I wish I could clone me. We have Oracle people who have managed to eat through 150TB in days, like locusts, consuming storage as fast as we stand it up. I absolutely love it, the sheer will to make something ordinary into a jewel, Oracle has done what cannot be done with Informix, nobody would want to to take a diamond and turn it into a chunk of salt. Informix needs to dumb down their product, and sell a shit load of really bad applications which in turn creates shit loads of work. I love it! I think that will work... :-) Ian Michael Gumby wrote: > Hey! > > I really am an easy going guy. > > We've all heard the rumors of an IDS TPC-E benchmark is somewhere going > to happen some day. > > After all, IDS *is* IBM's go to database for transactions! > > Back a couple of months ago. (Ok, like around January) > IBM published a TPC-C benchmark using DB2 9.5. > > Serge pointed out that IBM *had* everything set up for a DB2 benchmark, > so it was 'easier' to publish a TPC-C benchmark using DB2 than trying to > set up an IDS benchmark. IDS, you know, IBM's OLTP database. > > Well *everyone* knows that TPC-C is dead and that the new benchmark is > 'TPC-E'. Right? > Hmmm. Why doesn't someone tell both HP and IBM? > After IBM's benchmark, HP ran theirs. > Of course, IBM retaliates with yet another benchmark released today. > You can read about it here: > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/11/ibm_power6_tpcc/ > > The sad truth is that maybe there is a TPC-E benchmark on the way. We > may even see it someday. However, the perception that is getting > re-enforced is that IBM is paying "lip service" to the IDS crowd. Sales > critter will follow the "lead with DB2, then if all else fails, mention > IDS" from Janet's days. > > And its the perception that hurts all of us. > > But hey! What do I know? > I'm being paid to save the world from gits who blindly follow their GPS > systems and drive in to people's homes, ponds, and lakes. ;-) > > -G > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Now you can invite friends from Facebook and other groups to join you on > Windows Live' Messenger. Add them now! > <https://www.invite2messenger.net/im/?source=TXT_EML_WLH_AddNow_Now>;

Daniel, When you say it... it lacks sincerity. That you're creating FUD because you're an Oracle bigot. When I say it, I'm an Informix bigot who sees the hypocracy from IBM. > Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:00:10 -0700> From: damorgan@psoug.org> Subject: Re: Ok, call me silly...> To: informix-list@iiug.org> > Ian Michael Gumby wrote:> > > > However, the perception that is getting > > re-enforced is that IBM is paying "lip service" to the IDS crowd.> > To quote Bart Simpson ... "No duh!"> > Of course I sounds better when you say than when I do.> -- > Daniel A. Morgan> University of Washington> damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)> _______________________________________________> Informix-list mailing list> Informix-list@iiug.org> http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ Search that pays you back! Introducing Live Search cashback. http://search.live.com/cashback/?&pkw=form=MIJAAF/publ=HMTGL/crea=srchpaysyouback

Hey! I'm really a database agnostic. I stop at the logical level and focus on the architecture of the solution. I'm paid to make things work, in spite of the product choices the customer has made before I got there.... But that doesn't stop me from pointing out the constant gaffs made by IBM. Want to hear something pathetic? At IBM. I was present at a 100% club meeting, back in 2004. (And some wonder why I know so much about being cross matrixed to S&D ;-) A *senior* IBM exec gave a presentation. In this presentation he made a statement that if IBM could improve their customer sat by just 1%, it would result in a *billion dollar* improvement to their bottom line. I didn't studder... 1 billion dollars. It shows just how big IBM is. Now we look at IDS. When IBM does something that contradicts their stated marketing message, it has a negative impact on their future sales. Credibility is an element of customer sat. Its a component of establishing trust with a customer. Now just think, think, how much better IDS sales would be if they didn't have these mental farts and actually acted in a consistent manner? You can quote me on that. You know, its one thing if IDS was a crappy product. Its another when executive management on the soft side of the shop makes foolish decisions. Once could be forgiven. Twice in the period of months... shows stupidity. Fernando points out that this is an issue because its a "hardware" battle. But it still takes a database to run a TPC benchmark. And do you think that IBM hardware ran this without IBM SWG IM's involvement? Get real. One thing being Gumby... You may not like what I have to say, but I am at least consistent and honest. Thats more than I can say about a couple of people I know within IBM. Including some in IM. But hey! What do I know? ;-) Definitely more than I can say in public. -G > From: indeep@indeep.com> Subject: Re: Ok, call me silly...> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 17:26:54 -0700> To: informix-list@iiug.org> > Silly!> > You should really give up. I did. Oracle side of the house pays more> for doing less with less and more with more. Less quality and more of> it. More resources and less performance.> > You can argue and sing Informix's praises till the cows come home and> it won't change your personal economics, much less, Informix is nothing about> nothing, a complete and utter waste of time. I think the product is great> and has a lot of promise, but it's not going anywhere, so why on earth> do you waste your time with it beyond a casual, occasional glance at it.> IBM has seen fit to shove it in the back, no way you can win with a> strategy like that.> > > Informix :: The Database With Invisibility Built In> > > Oracle market share exploded last year, it will continue to entrench itself> and consume the market. It raises all the boats in harbor, so why not move> on. Informix may someday be a player, but it's virtually invisible. Oracle> applications are on fire, creating so much work I wish I could clone me. We> have Oracle people who have managed to eat through 150TB in days, like locusts,> consuming storage as fast as we stand it up. I absolutely love it, the sheer> will to make something ordinary into a jewel, Oracle has done what cannot be> done with Informix, nobody would want to to take a diamond and turn it into> a chunk of salt. Informix needs to dumb down their product, and sell a shit> load of really bad applications which in turn creates shit loads of work.> > I love it! I think that will work... :-)> > > > > Ian Michael Gumby wrote:> > Hey!> > > > I really am an easy going guy.> > > > We've all heard the rumors of an IDS TPC-E benchmark is somewhere going > > to happen some day.> > > > After all, IDS *is* IBM's go to database for transactions!> > > > Back a couple of months ago. (Ok, like around January)> > IBM published a TPC-C benchmark using DB2 9.5.> > > > Serge pointed out that IBM *had* everything set up for a DB2 benchmark, > > so it was 'easier' to publish a TPC-C benchmark using DB2 than trying to > > set up an IDS benchmark. IDS, you know, IBM's OLTP database.> > > > Well *everyone* knows that TPC-C is dead and that the new benchmark is > > 'TPC-E'. Right?> > Hmmm. Why doesn't someone tell both HP and IBM?> > After IBM's benchmark, HP ran theirs.> > Of course, IBM retaliates with yet another benchmark released today.> > You can read about it here:> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/11/ibm_power6_tpcc/>; > > > The sad truth is that maybe there is a TPC-E benchmark on the way. We > > may even see it someday. However, the perception that is getting > > re-enforced is that IBM is paying "lip service" to the IDS crowd. Sales > > critter will follow the "lead with DB2, then if all else fails, mention > > IDS" from Janet's days.> > > > And its the perception that hurts all of us.> > > > But hey! What do I know?> > I'm being paid to save the world from gits who blindly follow their GPS > > systems and drive in to people's homes, ponds, and lakes. ;-)> > > > -G> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------> > Now you can invite friends from Facebook and other groups to join you on > > Windows Live™ Messenger. Add them now! > > <https://www.invite2messenger.net/im/?source=TXT_EML_WLH_AddNow_Now>>; > _______________________________________________> Informix-list mailing list> Informix-list@iiug.org> http://www.iiug.org/mailman/listinfo/informix-list _________________________________________________________________ It’s easy to add contacts from Facebook and other social sites through Windows Live™ Messenger. Learn how. https://www.invite2messenger.net/im/?source=TXT_EML_WLH_LearnHow

InDeep wrote: > Silly! > > You should really give up. I did. Oracle side of the house pays more > for doing less with less and more with more. Less quality and more of > it. More resources and less performance. Perhaps his was true in the 80s. Perhaps it was true in the early 90s. But this is 2008 and the claim is downright preposterous. When you stop drowning in the "we're so great" KoolAid and get in touch with reality you will find that there are a number of RDBMS products that can equal or beat Informix's performance. If Informix is so great in 2008 you certainly can't tell that from the list of customers that use it. -- Daniel A. Morgan University of Washington damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

In article <1213295315.502969@bubbleator.drizzle.com>, DA Morgan says... >Perhaps his was true in the 80s. Perhaps it was true in the early 90s. >But this is 2008 and the claim is downright preposterous. When you >stop drowning in the "we're so great" KoolAid and get in touch with >reality you will find that there are a number of RDBMS products that >can equal or beat Informix's performance. And so are there number of rdbms products which can beat Oracle in performance. Or do you think that is not possible at all? On my laptop (Ubuntu Linux).I see Db2 9.5 consistently beat Oracle 10g in performance. I in fact see SQLite matching Oracle and DB2 in load speed. In a way I agree with you. These days almost all major RDBM's are more or less same for 80% of work. There may be some specialized work which some RDBMs do well. >If Informix is so great in 2008 you certainly can't tell that from >the list of customers that use it. the same way apple customers do not tell that apple OS is far better than Windows. Pls confirm.