Re: Informix vs. Sybase vs. Oracle vs. (gasp) MS SQL Server

Michael Segel wrote:
>
> Anthony Mandic wrote:
>
> > > Tell the airlines that row-level locking isn't important. If the entire
> > > seating table for a flight was locked for one attendent to assign you a seat,
> > > it'd be caos.
> >
> > Thats a table lock. Any programmer who does this deserves what'll
> > happen to him/her.
> >
>
> Uhm.... Locking a whole table because of a single flight?No, its most likely a page lock will
> lock an entire flight or class of seat assignments.
> BTW, thats Chaos. ;-)
>
> > > Row level locking is quite important in some instances. I also agree with his
> > > statement that to defend Sybase by saying that YOU don't think row level
> > > locking is important is silly.
> >
> > I thick the claims being made are specious without any hard
> > evidence to back them up. I have yet to see any. Can you or
> > anyone else provide a concrete example?
> >
> > -am
>
> Gee I mention hotel reservation systems. Yet you seem to let it slide in to the vapor.
> Airline reservations, etc ...
> The point is that there *ARE* applications which bennifit by having row level
> locking.
>
> As Pablo pointed out, yes, there is overhead involved. Yet, that is always the case.
> Costs vs. Bennifits. Row level locking has some bennifits which out weigh the costs.
> Now, as I said earlier, arguing that product B is better because it lacks an option that
> product A has, is silly. Its like saying that your car is a better car because it has disc
> breaks, over a car which has anti lock disc breaks. OK? Now do you see my point.
>
> Why don't you tell us what features Sybase has that Informix doesn't?
> OK?

THIS ^^^^ IS the point. What is so damn good about Sybase that would tell me it is better than Informix, with the apparent disadvantage of PLL? What's the kicker to Sybase that says, "Geez, I just gotta have it for *that* feature set!".

I've used Sybase a while back, probably 6 years ago and didn't see anything it had that Informix didn't have. If anything it had no 4GL, which was important, and was extremely overpriced. Not to mention poor to no documentation. Now where is Sybase? Crawling back from the dead, probably should be called "Phoenix". It does persist in being supposedly better than Oracle, by using true threading, whereas Oracle has only simulated threading through multiple processes. But features? What does Sybase have that is sooooooooo freakin good that even makes it worthy?

:-)

Tim

-- 
Tim Schaefer                         \\|//               
tschaefe_at_mindspring.com               6 6               
-------------------------------oOOo---( )---o00o----------------------
http://www.inxutil.com                         http://www.informix.com 
http://www.iiug.org                     news://comp.databases.informix 
mailto:majordomo_at_iiug.org   no subject  body: subscribe linux-informix  
======================================================================