Re: Db2, Oracle, SQL Server

From: Noons <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 22:05:12 +1100
Message-ID: <42171d52$0$25740$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>

hpuxrac apparently said,on my timestamp of 19/02/2005 9:40 AM:
>
> RAC of course is a huge improvement over OPS which didn't exactly meet
> a lot of customer expectations after the marketing hype of OPS went
> south.
>

Fantastic. Amazing how stating the obvious masquerades as "technical argumentation"...

> Just trying to keep the discussion honest.
>
> http://www-306.ibm.com/software/data/highlights/rac.pdf

And to keep a discussion "honest" you invoke a paper that purports to argue "code quality" comparisons based on size of IBM. Under some overall umbrella of "technical discussion". Are you totally insane?

>
> The IBM url above appears to be a marketing push for DB2 and as such
> cannot be trusted very far.

Amazing! Took you how long to figure this out? What was that about the "discussion honest"? Ah yes: more marketing CRAP!

> It's been a long time since I was hands on with DB2. It was a fine
> product then and is I am sure vastly improved, just as oracle has been
> improved.

Precisely.

-- 
Cheers
Nuno Souto
in sunny Sydney, Australia
wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au.nospam

Received on Sat Feb 19 2005 - 05:05:12 CST