Re: DB2 UDB or Oracle (who has better support)

"DA Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message news:1109881780.742577_at_yasure...
> > DB2 for AS/400, DB2 for Z/OS (mainframe), and DB2 for VM all have
different
> > code bases and all different from DB2 for Linux, UNIX, and Windows. But
at
> > the SQL level, they are pretty close.
>
> Pretty close doesn't cut it when a table name or column name doesn't fit
> into the data dictionary. They are different ... they are ... just
> accept it.
> --
> Daniel A. Morgan

I do accept that z/OS, VM, and AS/400 versions of DB2 are different, which is why I mentioned it.

DB2 for Linux, UNIX (AIX, Solaris, HP/UX), and Windows are the same for SQL and operational tasks except for some minor OS related things like OS file names (drive letters, back/forward slashes, etc)..

IBM publishes an SQL compatibility reference guide that shows all SQL differences, and progress is made every release toward getting them the same. But I doubt they will ever be exactly the same on all platforms. In addition, there will always be some significant operational differences for DBA's.

But if one is already using DB2 for z/OS, or DB2 VM, or DB2 for AS/400, then DB2 for Linux, UNIX and Windows is closer to these than is Oracle. I don't think you would be able to convince many companies to switch from DB2 for z/OS to Oracle for z/OS just so that they can be exactly compatible with Oracle on other platforms. Received on Thu Mar 03 2005 - 17:26:35 CST