Re: Informix 5.0 vs. 4.10 vs. 4.00?

Path: emory!wupost!uwm.edu!news.mr.med.ge.com!news.mr.med.ge.com!holder From: holder@gourde.positron.med.ge.com (Kacy Holder) Newsgroups: comp.databases.informix Message-ID: <HOLDER.92Mar5103749@gourde.positron.med.ge.com> Date: 5 Mar 92 15:37:49 GMT References: <2545@mixcom.COM> <1992Feb18.003103.25941@informix.com> <950@rand.mel.cocam.oz.au> Sender: news@mr.med.ge.com Organization: PET Engineering - GE Med. Systems, Milwaukee, WI, USA In-Reply-To: adamt@auzodt3.mel.cocam.oz.au's message of 4 Mar 92 13:08:10 GMT Nntp-Posting-Host: gourde In article <950@rand.mel.cocam.oz.au> adamt@auzodt3.mel.cocam.oz.au (Adam Tiller) writes: In article <1992Feb18.003103.25941@informix.com> dranney@informix.com (David Ranney) writes: >In article <2545@mixcom.COM> ttvvtt@mixcom.COM (Donald Amby) writes: >>We are getting ready to start a new project, based on Informix-4GL, for an >>established product that is currently running under 4.00 (and 4.10 on a >>parallel effort). I have just become aware of Informix version 5.0, and >>we need to make a decision as to what version to commit to? >> >>Does anyone have experiences with 5.0, and any existing 4.00 or 4.10 >>version applications? Our consultant from Informix is installing 5.0 on our Sun systems as I write. We also have 5.0 for the HP. We use ESQL/C and it appears they reconfiqured the include and library directories :-(. That means we have to redo our Imake rules. But the option of *not* going to 5.0 does not exist for us. Referential integrity is going to save us a chunk of development time and stored procedures could save us some more. Good luck with your choice. -- Katharine C. Holder, CPU Inc. holderk@med.ge.com "It's not a bug. It's a feature."