Re: Is SQL for OS/2 2.0 s

From: Joe Bartling <joe.bartling_at_sqlware.com>
Date: 9 May 93 00:19:00 GMT
Message-ID: <2357.204.uupcb_at_sqlware.com>

FDW>Newsgroups: comp.databases.oracle,comp.os.os2.networking,comp.os.os2.advocac
FDW>From: fw_at_world.std.com (forrest d whitcher)
FDW>Subject: Re: Is SQL for OS/2 2.0 slow?
FDW>Message-ID: <C5L24J.2yy_at_world.std.com>
FDW>Followup-To: comp.databases.oracle
FDW>Keywords: os/2 sql slow
FDW>Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 15:38:42 GMT

FDW>In article <jeffgusC5Kp5t.Fn4_at_netcom.com> jeffgus_at_netcom.com (Jeffrey Gustaf
FDW> writes:
FDW>>       I work at a company that runs a medium to large LAN.  Right
FDW>>now we are using OS/2 1.x on the servers.  We have 2 apps that use LAN
FDW>>Manager's SQL server.  The network administrator said that he is going
FDW>>to install Windows NT when it is released.  I asked him why.  He said

FDW>>that OS/2 2.0's SQL server is VERY slow compared to 1.3's. Has FDW>>anybody had experience with both versions of the SQL server?

FDW>Microsoft SQL server certainly hasn't been ported to a 32 bit 2.0 version. FDW>I don't know about the Sybase product.

FDW>Oracle server for 2.0 has been available for a year now, Ingres has been
FDW>selling theirs for a couple of months. I am using the former, and think
FDW>well of the latter. Oracle looks better (imho) in heterogenous network,
FDW>o/s environments, Ingres would be a very good choice in a unix-centric
FDW>network. Ingres seems to have better tools for serious application
FDW>development, though Oracle is said to have improved their offerings with
FDW>the new version 7.

FDW>Oracle's 16 bit version ran ok on my 2.0 system (before applying the
FDW>service pack) I measured perfomance before and after upgrading to the
FDW>32 bit code, found 65% average boost with various tasks running between 40
FDW>and 100% faster. Oracle 7 should further improve these numbers. I think
FDW>Oracle and Ingress both claim on the order of 40 transactions per second

FDW>for the os/2 32 bit, though I wouldn't choose an rdbms just on performance FDW>numbers.

FDW>>       He also said something else that's interesting.  It shows that
FDW>>he is a little biased.  He mentioned that "IBM always makes software
FDW>>that ONLY works the right way on IBM computers."  Obviously NT will
FDW>>work perfectly on all computers... right?

FDW>Certainly given that os/2 runs ok on your clone (500+ tested by IBM at this
FDW>time?) your os/2 rdbms should also. We selected Oracle largely for the

FDW>ability to scale our work to larger platforms, or across a network as FDW>needed.

FDW>I have directed followups to comp.databases.oracle

FDW>>--
FDW>>Jeffrey Gustafson jeffgus_at_netcom.COM
FDW>>Netcom - Online Communication Services San Jose, CA

FDW>Forrest Whitcher                fw_at_world.std.com
FDW>Boston Scientific Corp.         Watertown MA

---
 . OLX 2.1 TD . All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.
                                                 
----
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+


| SQLWare BBS  703-771-4158 (HST V.32BIS-Specializing in ORACLE and other  |


| RDBMS topics.  Sponsored by SQLWare Inc., Leesburg,VA-300 conferences.   |

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Received on Sun May 09 1993 - 02:19:00 CEST