Re: Comparison of DB2 and Oracle?

mikharakiri_nospaum_at_yahoo.com (Mikito Harakiri) wrote in message news:<8a529bb.0410200902.53af24b9_at_posting.google.com>...

> I alway wondered what is the true value of those bells and whistles.

Because you reject that they can be useful?

> Let's not forget that RDBMS essentially is a SQL execution engine, and

Most definitely not. That is a file system. A *database* (that is what the "D" in RDBMS stands for) is not even necessarily a SQL execution engine: it could be an execution engine for many other languages. And then there is the *relational* bit attached to it: the "R". IF you don't know what that means and what it can do *way beyond* SQL itself ever will, then there is no point in going there. Just use it as a "SQL engine". While others laugh.

> everything else should be judged from the perspective how well does it
> fit into that primary purpose. Therefore, let's go through your list
> itemized:

Your primary purpose is totally wrong. You don't need a RDBMS, you need only a SQL engine. Obviously, you can do everything else the database can do, yourself, and better. What can I say? Received on Wed Oct 20 2004 - 22:21:41 CDT