Re: is it really true that db2 is overtaking oracle ?

>
>
> SLAC? Now we are talking about science:) Considering how much data their
> detectors have to collect to map out the trajectories of those fine particles,
> it's interesting but hardly surprising that they have databases of that size.
> You can bet that Fermi, Argonne, or Lawrence Livermore have something similar.
> Too bad they didn't choose Oracle. But then, of course, Objectivity is the
> better choice.

About databases. I just brought it up as a curiosity. They say it is the largest database.

They could be running all this system on plain files. It all depends on the requirements. F.e. I doubt that Objectivity allows for concurrency and offers a lot of recovery options. But maybe these are not so very needed.

>
>
> Speaking of Oracle vs DB2, I'll have to believe Oracle is here to stay. If
> history is any indication, IBM will find a way to give away their market share.
> If they don't, we'll need to start learning DB2.

I hear rumors about people choosing db2 over oracle for large volumes of data. If they are true, I would like to know why. If oracle is a superior system, then its superiority should show on the large volumes. Why isn't it? Can someone maybe speak in favor of db2 and shed some light on the offerings that it gives? Received on Fri Aug 16 2002 - 00:47:11 CDT