Re: Company thought DB2 will be better than Oracle.
This is a largely argumentative DB2-vs-Oracle thread rather than a technical help request. The disputed point is Daniel Morgan's claim that DB2 requires a C compiler on the production machine, since (external) stored procedures must be compiled on the target platform and can't simply be built on, say, AIX and deployed to OS/390. Others called the claim bogus or argued that a proper development environment should be a clone of production; Morgan countered that shipping software to many customers' differing platforms makes on-site recompiling necessary. The exchange ends with the two sides unreconciled and no resolution recorded, plus some off-topic joking.
Auto-generated by DrWatson from the posts below — may be imperfect; read the full thread.
Daniel Morgan <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1063490783.919594@yasure>... > So no attempt was made or intended to insult you, IBM, DB2, or anything > else. What was made was a staight-forward statement of fact based on my > years working with DB2 Your subjective claims ("low" number of...) were dubious, your single hard claim (need for C compiler on production box), bogus. > and statements confirmed by others here in the DB2 forum. Oh come on! Type "earth is flat" into Google and you'll find people who support that point of view. Everyone from experts to total incompetents post to computing forums. Next time, do try being selective when using the Internet. DG
Database Guy wrote: > Oh come on! Type "earth is flat" into Google and you'll find people > who support that point of view. Everyone from experts to total > incompetents post to computing forums. Next time, do try being > selective when using the Internet. It's not flat? But then why don't I fall off? Tell me that, smarty-pants! -- "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche
Database Guy wrote: >Daniel Morgan <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1063490783.919594@yasure>... > > >>So no attempt was made or intended to insult you, IBM, DB2, or anything >>else. What was made was a staight-forward statement of fact based on my >>years working with DB2 >> >> > >Your subjective claims ("low" number of...) were dubious, your single >hard claim (need for C compiler on production box), bogus. > Absolutely not. You must recompile on the production box, or should I add a clone of the production box. Which is really the same thing. You can not compile on AIX 5L and deploy on OS/390. And if you can, now, please point me to a link at ibm.com that confirms this change. Thanks. -- Daniel Morgan http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)
You probably haven't turned on "Transparent Application Fallover" yet. DBA Obnoxio The Clown wrote: > Database Guy wrote: > > > Oh come on! Type "earth is flat" into Google and you'll find people > > who support that point of view. Everyone from experts to total > > incompetents post to computing forums. Next time, do try being > > selective when using the Internet. > > It's not flat? But then why don't I fall off? Tell me that, smarty-pants! > > -- > "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" > - Coluche
"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:1063673747.987366@yasure... > Database Guy wrote: > > >Daniel Morgan <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:<1063490783.919594@yasure>... > > > > > >>So no attempt was made or intended to insult you, IBM, DB2, or anything > >>else. What was made was a staight-forward statement of fact based on my > >>years working with DB2 > > > >Your subjective claims ("low" number of...) were dubious, your single > >hard claim (need for C compiler on production box), bogus. > > > Absolutely not. You must recompile on the production box, or should I > add a clone of the production box. Your development environment should contain a suitable clone of the production box -- the same hardware (but perhaps on a smaller scale), running the same versions of the operating system and DB2. In this case, you develop on the development box, and then just install the final executables and SQL language elements on the production server, when they're ready for production. If your development environment does not have a clone of your production box, then your production environment is just a mere extension of your development environment -- a risky proposition, at best -- and will be subject to the possiblity of disastrous failure, regardless of your choice of OS or RDBMS. -- Matt Emmerton
Matthew Emmerton wrote: >"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote in message >news:1063673747.987366@yasure... > > >>Database Guy wrote: >> >> >> >>>Daniel Morgan <damorgan@x.washington.edu> wrote in message >>> >>> >news:<1063490783.919594@yasure>... > > >>> >>> >>>>So no attempt was made or intended to insult you, IBM, DB2, or anything >>>>else. What was made was a staight-forward statement of fact based on my >>>>years working with DB2 >>>> >>>> >>>Your subjective claims ("low" number of...) were dubious, your single >>>hard claim (need for C compiler on production box), bogus. >>> >>> >>> >>Absolutely not. You must recompile on the production box, or should I >>add a clone of the production box. >> >> > >Your development environment should contain a suitable clone of the >production box -- the same hardware (but perhaps on a smaller scale), >running the same versions of the operating system and DB2. In this case, >you develop on the development box, and then just install the final >executables and SQL language elements on the production server, when they're >ready for production. > >If your development environment does not have a clone of your production >box, then your production environment is just a mere extension of your >development environment -- a risky proposition, at best -- and will be >subject to the possiblity of disastrous failure, regardless of your choice >of OS or RDBMS. > >-- >Matt Emmerton > > > Great in theory. But consider this ... I want to build an application and sell it to customers at ten different locations. My choice ... buy my own Windows, AIX, AS/400, and OS/390 machines matching my potential client's environments ... or ... put a C compiler on their box and recompile. It isn't that big a deal ... but it is a fact. And it is a fact that is not true with other commercial RDBMS products. Lets not beat this thing to death. It is just a fact of life with DB2. -- Daniel Morgan http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)