Re: No future for DB2

Noons wrote:
> Sure. But there is still a very clear limit: going back to
> the volumes bit I mentioned above. Those of us who still have
> to process serious amounts of data in as little time as possible
> are still using good old C/C++, shell scripts, perl here and there
> and maybe in a moment of light-headed enthusiasm, python/php. (Now,
> THOSE are interesting languages!)

Funny, I thought assembly language to rules supreme. Layers of abstraction:
microcoding,
assembly,
C/C++
Java
...

Folks are debating DBA skills in these forums. Ever tried to get C/C++ skills? It's a b**** to get a good C programmer nowadays. Certainty the kids who wrote C when they were 16 and hit the job with 10 years experience don't exist anymore.
Point being, you wouldn't go back to micro-coding, you wouldn't go back to assembly. Too expensive in labour, too unwieldy. C/C++ is already turning into a niche skill. The abstraction layer just keeps on rising because Moore's law and inflation favours throwing Hz and bytes at any problem over brain.

> Because very clearly Java, J2EE and XML technologies haven't
> got a SINGLE chance in heck of ever coping with serious volumes
> and STILL remain cost-effective. And that has been made
> painfully clear to me beyond any doubt: nowadays that I have to
> cope again with seriously large data volumes instead of the total
> JOKE of Java "apps" I've had to deal with for the last 4 years.
See above. You, I, we are too expensive. We expect our salaries to rise.

Cheers
Serge

-- 
Serge Rielau
DB2 SQL Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Lab