Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Db2, Oracle, SQL Server

Re: Db2, Oracle, SQL Server

From: Valentin Minzatu <v.a.l.e.n.t.i.n.m.i.n.z.a.t.u_at_y_a_h_o_o.c_o_m>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 20:01:04 -0800
Message-ID: <>

I got to the Oracle document. I am not sure what was your point... Is SQL PL doing BULK operations? Is there a feature similar to autonomous transactions? What about PL/SQL tables, varrays and, in general, operating with collections... I'll stop here for now. Talking about packages : I see uses for global variables, such as having a global variable shared among sessions without having to do any I/O, what do you think?

"Serge Rielau" <> wrote in message
> Valentin Minzatu wrote:
> > I still cannot recollect which IBM document I've seen where it was
> > that DB2's HA feature does not replicate DDLs or some of them, but I
> > get back once I find it. Consider this one closed for now.
> Whatever it was the doc was faulty.
> The only place where one has to be careful is with LOAD. It must be a
> recoverable load and the copy must be on a shared filesystem/TSM.
> > Per my understanding: DB2 partitions the data at the cluster level (must
> > have a cluster, parallel server?), therefore each node has its own data
> > when the query is submitted, one node acts as a dispatcher while the
> > execute it and then the results are merged in memory. Oracle allows for
> > as well, but it does not impose it as a limit. One could easily execute
> > same query in a serial manner (i.e. one single server process retrieves
> > the data querying each partition). The advantage is that if one of the
> > go down you do not need to repartition the table or move data around at
> > It is already available as it is shared by all nodes. - please correct
me if
> > i am wrong - I would also like to know if DB2 has the ability to
> > partitions without taking the table/partition offline.
> I don't kno whwat the latter means, and I have in detail talked about
> the first point. It is irrelevant whether DB2 requires all the nodes up
> or not as long as a node can fail over similarly quick as it takes e.g.
> RAC to evict a node (which is not free!)

Oracle partitioning works in either single node or clustered environment the same way. One does not need to have RAC in order to take advantage of partitioning.
Exchanging partitions means that one (sub)partition of a table can be exchanged for a non-partitioned table having the same structure and indexes -> you can practically build the (sub)partition outside the table.

> It is unreasonable to require two DBMS to use the same Technology(tm).
> It is reasonably to except the same end result.
> What matters is whether a DBMS can scale, perform, has HA, .... and what
> the TCO of it is.
> Any more low level metric means buying into a vendor's marketing labels.
> > I couldn't find the Oracle's document you refered to (maybe they hid it
> > ??). - i have just removed the rest of this paragraph as they could have
> > caused some flames :)
> The doc on PSM support? It's in the SQL Ref.. Maybe your browser
> couldn't handle the wrapped line for teh URL?
> > ASM is there since 2004 - when they launched 10g, and one of the biggies
> > about it is that one can transport tablespaces from one DB to another
> > independent of the O/S (neat, huh?).
> Yes. Only a fool claims that everything the competition has is bad by
> definition. I'm no fool - I think :-)

I hope not ;-)

> Know your strengths, know your weaknesses.
> Know the same about your competitors...
> Cheers
> Serge
> --
> Serge Rielau
> DB2 SQL Compiler Development
> IBM Toronto Lab
Received on Thu Feb 10 2005 - 22:01:04 CST

Original text of this message