Re: IDS Feature Request List (including potential new requests).

Serge Rielau wrote: > DA Morgan wrote: > >> Not an Oracle person ... a Fortran to Cobol to DB2 to Oracle person. >> My experience with Informix, granted it was some years ago, left a >> definite impression that ... given the choice ... I'd rather be in >> Informix than DB2 were that the choices on the table. But then I'm >> one of those people that likes Sybase more than SQL Server and we all >> know where that one is going to end up too. > > Hmm, did'you rile just a few posts up about the need for continued > education? How can you make statements about Informix and DB2 if you > know only "neolithic" versions of one or both? > > Cheers > Serge I'm planning on taking a sabbatical in 2007-08 specifically for the purpose of spending a year or two in the major commercial and open-source RDBMS products. The end result possibly likely a book. One can't stay current with all technologies all of the time. So I keep up on the usenet groups, read the occassional book, and in Informix and DB2 they are very occassional as you know, and have each product installed on a server where I can play when time allows. Which isn't a lot ... thus my plans for 2007. -- Daniel A. Morgan http://www.psoug.org damorgan@x.washington.edu (replace x with u to respond)

DA Morgan said: > > The end result possibly likely a book. Wow. I can't wait. -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ' dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com