Re: Which one is better? Oracel 9i or DB2 7.2??

In article <37fab3ab.0205060746.1322b874_at_posting.google.com>, mikerault_at_earthlink.net (Mike Ault) wrote:
>> I believe the most important design choice/decision when implementing your
>> system is to make sure your trading system will only use standardized
> features
>> provided by both vendors, and possibly other brands as well. If you are able
>
>Sorry, don't agree here at all. By limiting yourself to ANSI SQL
>(which is in effect what you are saying) you code to the most common
>denominator and invalidate any performance features you may have
>purchased with the system you buy. Essentially you are limiting
>yourself to the most limited platform, which to me is not a good idea.
>Buy a product for its features, use the features and optimize
>performance. Using your argument we would all be using ISAM...

Yes, you would be limiting yourself to the most limited of the required platform. That is the point.

If my requirements spec included DB2 and Oracle (which was the case for the original poster), I would go for the most common denominator of those two. If the spec included another brand (perhaps the 'Ulan-Bator database') we would be limited of the features offered by these three. If that is ISAM and other parts of the project requires more than ISAM can offer, then 'Ulan-Bator' should be dropped from the list of required databases. We can do that since the list still includes more than one supplier.

-
Robert Sundström, Mimer SQL Development
Upright Database Technology AB, http://www.mimer.com Received on Wed May 08 2002 - 06:30:42 CDT