Still 22 is a lot more than 6.
Jim
"Blair Adamache" <adamache_at_ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:3B774112.C05E422_at_ca.ibm.com...
> DB2 on each platform is compiled from the same common source tree every
night.
> This keeps development on all platforms in lockstep. Platform differences
are
> isolated in one layer of code. This means that DB2 on all Windows and Unix
> platforms is available at the same time. We do not delay platforms so they
can
> all be released on the same day. To do so would be to give up revenue.
>
> I'm not sure what Oracle is doing on Linux: with DB2 we build on one Linux
> distribution, and test with several. we list only Linux kernel pre-reqs,
not
> specific distributions as what we support.
>
> According to a Gartner report released in 11/1998, "Oracle, which more
than any
> other DBMS vendor prided itself on supporting the largest number of ports,
has
> reduced its portfolio from more than 100 ports to 22". I expect that
Oracle 9i
> will further shrink this list.
>
> Jim Kennedy wrote:
>
> > I would doubt that internally each platform development for a release
> > actually occurs at the same time. That is internal to IBM (not visible
to
> > the public) each release on each platform is probably done or finished
at
> > different times. So that in actuality IBM must be delaying one or more
> > platforms in order that they all are "released" on the same day. (or
close
> > enough to the same day) If DB2 only runs on 6 platforms (I'm counting
Linux
> > as one) then this strategy is probably feasible as the developers, QA
etc.
> > for these platforms probably finish fairly close together. In Oracle's
case
> > we are talking something like 90 platforms (still only counting Linux as
> > one) and so it really wouldn't be feasible to release all in the same
month
> > never mind the same day.
> >
> > Thus it is possible that Oracle will support multiple Linux releases in
the
> > future. However, Oracle will not make them all available at the same
time.
> > In all likelihood Oracle probably has the same Linux developers working
on
> > different Linux releases; therefore it is probably a serial release. I
> > imagine that they released on what they perceive as the most popular
Linux
> > distribution. (They may be wrong, I don't know I don't know the
differences
> > between different Linux distributions.) As one person pointed out
Oracle 9i
> > for Windows NT is not even out yet.
> >
> > IMHO we have two different release strategies here. As Blair points out
IBM
> > releases everything at once and Oracle dribbles the release out among
its
> > platforms. Given the widely different number of platforms that they two
> > companies support I think they make sense for each company given its
> > situation.
> >
> > This reminds me of a story I was told by an old IBMer. He was working
on a
> > project and the computer had to support like 30 users at the same time.
The
> > marketing folks wanted the response time on a particular benchmark to be
the
> > same whether there was one user or 30 users. This sounds fantastic and
what
> > a great marketing requirement. (devoid of how machines actually work)
So
> > you can guess how they accomplished this "feat". The OS inserted wait
> > states depending upon how many people were on the system. Fewer people
more
> > wait states. But they met the requirement. This happened a long time
ago
> > (probably about 40 to 50 years ago).
> >
> > Jim
> >
> > "Blair Adamache" <adamache_at_ca.ibm.com> wrote in message
> > news:3B772DE1.6E135831_at_ca.ibm.com...
> > > Maybe for Oracle. Each DB2 Unix/Windows release is available on all
supported
> > > platforms on the same day: Windows, multiple Linux distributions, AIX,
Solaris,
> > > HP and OS/2.
> > >
> > > Dino Hsu wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear Howard,
> > > >
> > > > Do you mean the real release date from the first platform to the
last
> > > > platform can span several months to one year? I am sorry I don't
know
> > > > that. By the way, has Oracle published a schedule of the release
dates
> > > > of individual platforms?
> > > >
> > > > Dino
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:03:07 +1000, "Howard J. Rogers"
> > > > <howardjr_at_www.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >"Dino Hsu" <dino1_at_ms1.hinet.net> wrote in message
> > > > >news:2v3ant40th3s908so2458bg6gvb4lh2nib_at_4ax.com...
> > > > >> Dear all,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I am confused when I see this line everywhere:
> > > > >> "We discovered that nothing runs on Linux bettern than DB2"
> > > > >> Oracle doesn't seem to care too much about Linux, it's 9i only
> > > > >> supports one SuSe distribution. (if it cares, Red Hat and other
major
> > > > >> distributions should be supported as well).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >It's a daft argument, put like that. Oracle 9i for NT isn't even
out
yet...
> > > > >does that mean Oracle doesn't care about NT? No, it means that
products
> > > > >have release plans and cycles... and just as NT is rather down on
that
list,
> > > > >so is any other Linux distribution than SuSe.
> > > > >
> > > > >They have to start somewhere, for heaven's sake!
> > > > >
> > > > >If 9i isn't running on most major distributions of Linux by mid
2002 at
the
> > > > >latest, I'd be very much surprised.
> > > > >
> > > > >HJR
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Furthermore, many people here (senior DBA's) don't think of Linux
as
a
> > > > >> 'Unix'. To them, Unix means IBM AIX, Sun Solaris, HP-UX, etc..
This
> > > > >> may be due to Linux's growing up from PC-based machines, although
> > > > >> later ported to many different H/W platforms.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On the other hand, IBM is so supportive about Linux, it even uses
> > > > >> Linux in the world's biggest supercomputer:
> > > > >> http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20010809S0018
> > > > >> Linux and AIX are both Unix's, IBM may have to choose one of them
as
a
> > > > >> result. Is it because IBM likes open source software so much that
it
> > > > >> cannot but take Linux back home?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Can someone comment on this? Thanks in advance.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Dino
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > >
>
Received on Mon Aug 13 2001 - 08:14:55 CDT
