Re: OT: Here we go again.....

"Dusan Bolek" <pagesflames_at_usa.net> wrote in message news:1e8276d6.0402050230.340d3041_at_posting.google.com...

> > You are messing up the timeline here. DB2 z/Series is older than DB2 for
> > Multiplatforms. Why did those same (yes they were the same!) engineers
> > choose shared nothing after having done DB2 z/Series with the parallel
> > sysplex? Maybe it was an oversight? What were they thinking? "Oops"?

One could argue that being mainframe developers with NO CLUE how to develop in a Unix environment with its multi-processing and shared memory segments (slightly different from an ASM370 common block), nothing else could be expected. Nothing to do with shareplex. Which BTW is NOT the ONLY way to implement a multi-processor OS.

Let me see: who pushed shared nothing in the bad old days? The guys who didn't know how to code shared memory in Unix. Yup...

> Nice to see you back. I really missed all that Oracle vs. DB2 flames
> that were so popular in this NG few years ago. :-)

Same old same old. They are ALWAYS right. Because they are from IttyBittyMachines. Every body else in this industry is dead wrong or has an axe to grind.

<yawn...>

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam