Re: DB2 vs Oracle

>Mike Oswald (moswald_at_unmc.edu) wrote:
>: They have the test environment setup on a RS/6000 and Oracle was going
>: to win out until one of the IBMers told a management type that they would
>: have to spend $500K more for hardware for Oracle.
 

>If somebody who sells hardware tells you not to use Oracle, because you
>have to spend more on hardware...... I would be suspicious. Maybe they want
>you to use DB2 because your tied into the hardware vendor for the rest of
>your life?

Hi Mike.

I do not know exactly what the salesperson was referring to but it might be the fact that IBM feels that its upcoming "share-nothing" DB2/6000 architecture may be more efficient and scalable than Oracle's SMP or cluster architectures. I think that IBM may be able to make a case once the product is out but since the new DB2/6000 is not available for release it is not possible to evaluate these claims. The question is whether your company is at all interested in evaluating beta software and are you willing to go ahead and wait until it is actually released (or alternatively use beta copies during your development). I doubt that DB2/6000 in its current production form can outperform Oracle 7.1. Does anyone know when the new version of DB2/6000 will be available.

Of course all of this presupposes that performance and resource utilization is an important requirement. It could be that other requirements are much more important to your organization.

Hope this helps a bit.

Regards,

Rich

Richard Finkelstein
Performance Computing, Inc.
312-549-8325 (Voice)
312-549-4824 (Fax) Received on Tue Jan 17 1995 - 23:45:45 CET