Re: DB2 HADB

From: DA Morgan <damorgan_at_psoug.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:52:05 -0800
Message-ID: <1133225519.638613@jetspin.drizzle.com>

Mark A wrote:
> "Jim Kennedy" <kennedy-downwithspammersfamily_at_attbi.net> wrote in message
> news:k82dncQ-Ic-eihbeRVn-qQ_at_comcast.com...
>

>>>Serge,
>>
>>Learn how to read something other than code.  I said that it was 
>>irrelevant
>>to the argument.  nonsequitor is Latin for "it doesn't follow".  It is 
>>quite
>>common at large sites to have more than one type of machine and more than
>>one type of OS. (eg SUN hardware running Solaris and Dell hardware running
>>Windows etc.)  So one could have a database on several different 
>>platforms.
>>Having a database with the same name but operate differently just
>>unnecessarily complicates things.
>>
>>Jim
>>

>
>
> DB2 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows (LUW) is a single product and does run the
> same on SUN, AIX, HP/UX, Linux (x86, AMD64/EM64T, I64, z Series), Windows
> 32-bit, and Windows 64-bit. There is one set of DB2 manuals for all these
> platforms.
>
> It is true that DB2 for z/OS and DB2 for AS/400 are different products from
> DB2 for LUW, but Oracle either has a lousy product on that platform that
> companies only rarely use (z/OS), or does not even support (AS/400).
>
> So your argument nonsequitor.

No his argument is valid. There are plenty of large companies running Oracle on mainframes and there is huge value in being able to seemlessly move between that mainframe database and all other platforms.

AS/400 ... who cares? When someone does ... no doubt Oracle will too.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
http://www.psoug.org
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)

Received on Mon Nov 28 2005 - 18:52:05 CST