Re: Running Informix on 2 different Servers in parrallel
Neil Truby wrote: > "Art S. Kagel" <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > news:41BF66EE.1090103@bloomberg.net... > > >>Don't go windows, you already know UNIX, go with Linux. There are many >>excellent releases of Linux and IDS runs very well on them. You will not >>be able to get IDS 7.20 (which BTW is very old, out of support, and not >>even Y2K compliant). But you could build the new server, port everything >>there, and make that the new main box while building a new backup box, >>also running Linux. I'd recommend going to IDS 9.40UC5 or later. > > > As a matter of interest, now that IBM has extended the end-of-support to v7, > why would you recommend a user on a very old version of v7, by all accounts > not very innovative, move to v9? Not saying your wrong but one of my users > asked me the same question today: "Why should I move to v9 if I'm happy on > v7?". "To help pay for my holiday in The Maldives" is the actual answer, > but didn't seem politic, so I said I'd think about it. Thing is, I'd like > to sure I'm not missing anything before replying. For a user who is > comfortable with v7, does not want to use user-defined datatypes or > datablades (in my experince, 90%++ of them), and whose database is modest > enough in size that the 2G chunk limit is not a major inconvenience, what > other imperatives are there? My reasons are several, and I've made the recommendation to friends I've helped out and here at Bloomberg. Vis: - LVARCHAR is much nicer than VARCHAR and has uses that are not appropriate for CHAR. - I find functional indexes very useful. - IDS 9.4 is 10-15% faster than 7.31. - SERIAL8 & INT8 are very useful in the real world, much as I like DECIMAL. - 9.4+ is the path that will grow more and more compatible with DB2 and its successor. If later I decide that's the way to go, I'm already there. Meanwhile I get the latest goodies as they appear like the rest of this list. - Lower overhead checkpoints. - Automatic logical log management. - No more lock table overflows (I know 7.31 has it too). - Ability to create external table interfaces to other data sources. - Improved ER performance. - DBspace renaming. - Direct path to 9.5 with all it promises which includes several of my wish list items. Art S. Kagel
"Art S. Kagel" <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message news:41C08CD7.7000100@bloomberg.net... > Neil Truby wrote: > what other imperatives [to move from v7 to v9] are there? > My reasons are several, and I've made the recommendation to friends I've > helped out and here at Bloomberg. Vis: > - LVARCHAR is much nicer than VARCHAR and has uses that are not > appropriate for CHAR. > - I find functional indexes very useful. > - IDS 9.4 is 10-15% faster than 7.31. > - SERIAL8 & INT8 are very useful in the real world, much as I like > DECIMAL. > - 9.4+ is the path that will grow more and more compatible with DB2 and > its successor. If later I decide that's the way to go, I'm already there. > Meanwhile I get the latest goodies as they appear like the rest of this > list. > - Lower overhead checkpoints. > - Automatic logical log management. > - No more lock table overflows (I know 7.31 has it too). > - Ability to create external table interfaces to other data sources. > - Improved ER performance. > - DBspace renaming. > - Direct path to 9.5 with all it promises which includes several of my > wish list items. Can this be a reply to wcottishpoet too? Well, I think the performance one is a moot point. I agree that if you know what you are doing you can get more out of v9. But remember, you (and wcottishpoet, and I of course!) are Informix Gods. The fact is that the most sites *don't* have dedicated, knowledgable DBAs. And if they are that type of customer they aren't likely to be much bothered with (what they would see as) arcane performance features, replication, interfaces to external sources, functional indexes, user-defined data types and the rest. The quick migration path to DB2 is a killer benefit though :-))
My alter ego was called many things in the past, but and Informix God?? We can say performance is a moot point, but, as I think I have shown in my list - which may not be complete - , there is a long (and growing list) of new things in IDS 9 that are not there in IDS 7. The longer that list becomes the longer it will take DB2 to "catch up"! Lets be positive! There are a lot of good thinsg in my list! Neil Truby wrote: > "Art S. Kagel" <kagel@bloomberg.net> wrote in message > news:41C08CD7.7000100@bloomberg.net... > > Neil Truby wrote: > > what other imperatives [to move from v7 to v9] are there? > > > My reasons are several, and I've made the recommendation to friends I've > > helped out and here at Bloomberg. Vis: > > > - LVARCHAR is much nicer than VARCHAR and has uses that are not > > appropriate for CHAR. > > - I find functional indexes very useful. > > - IDS 9.4 is 10-15% faster than 7.31. > > - SERIAL8 & INT8 are very useful in the real world, much as I like > > DECIMAL. > > - 9.4+ is the path that will grow more and more compatible with DB2 and > > its successor. If later I decide that's the way to go, I'm already there. > > Meanwhile I get the latest goodies as they appear like the rest of this > > list. > > - Lower overhead checkpoints. > > - Automatic logical log management. > > - No more lock table overflows (I know 7.31 has it too). > > - Ability to create external table interfaces to other data sources. > > - Improved ER performance. > > - DBspace renaming. > > - Direct path to 9.5 with all it promises which includes several of my > > wish list items. > > Can this be a reply to wcottishpoet too? > > Well, I think the performance one is a moot point. I agree that if you know > what you are doing you can get more out of v9. But remember, you (and > wcottishpoet, and I of course!) are Informix Gods. The fact is that the > most sites *don't* have dedicated, knowledgable DBAs. And if they are that > type of customer they aren't likely to be much bothered with (what they > would see as) arcane performance features, replication, interfaces to > external sources, functional indexes, user-defined data types and the rest. > > The quick migration path to DB2 is a killer benefit though :-))
there are a number of enhancements in my list which help the sites with no dba, eg add a chunk when the first chunk is full, no libaries in /usr/lib The benefits for every site will be different but there must be a fw on the list. Performance isn;t the only think I put in the list.
----- Original Message ----- From: "scottishpoet" <dryburghj@yahoo.com> Newsgroups: comp.databases.informix Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004 12:19 AM Subject: Re: Running Informix on 2 different Servers in parrallel > My alter ego was called many things in the past, but and Informix God?? > > We can say performance is a moot point, but, as I think I have shown in > my list - which may not be complete - , there is a long (and growing > list) of new things in IDS 9 that are not there in IDS 7. The longer > that list becomes the longer it will take DB2 to "catch up"! > > Lets be positive! There are a lot of good thinsg in my list! Yes, there *are* a lot of good things in your list (assuming you are also wcottishpoet:-)). They are really features, rather than benefits. But they *are* good things. Are they enough to persuade the average user to pay a hefty uplift for?