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

Mark A wrote:

>>>> How about the fact that DB2 has a different code base
>>
>>for different operating systems. Change from UNIX to Windows and you
>>might as well be changing to Sybase.
>>...<<
>>
>>Well, lots of people have test servers running DB2 UDB on Windows and
>>production running DB2 UDB on Linux or UNIX.
>>
>>Are you saying they should switch to a more realistic test
>>ennvironment?
>>

> 
> Daniel does not know very much about DB2 and he (sort of) restricted his
> statement in another post.
> 
> Daniel is very upset, however, that DB2 for AS/400 and VM, and z/OS have
> different code bases from each other and from DB2 for Linux, UNIX, and
> Windows. This is true even though Oracle does not run on AS/400 or VM, and
> is not used in production very often on z/OS (formally known as OS/390).

Daniel is not very upset though if he was it would hardly be something of which you would be aware. What Daniel doesn't like is the fact that those such as you who think DB2 is an object of religious faith try to minimize what is a major weakness in the product just as you try to pretend that shared-nothing (DB2 on Windows, *NIX) and shared-everything (DB2 on mainframes) are somehow the same product because the same name is printed on the CD. DB2 on the mainframe is an excellent product. DB2 on Windows and *NIX is, at best, adequate.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)