Re: Company thought DB2 will be better than Oracle.

From: Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:01:19 -0700
Message-ID: <1063922468.366971_at_yasure>

Pablo Sanchez wrote:

Daniel Morgan <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in
news:1063677908.937277_at_yasure: 

  

Great in theory. But consider this ... I want to build an
application and sell it to customers at ten different locations.

My choice ... buy my own Windows, AIX, AS/400, and OS/390 machines
matching my potential client's environments ... or ... put a C
compiler on their box and recompile. It isn't that big a deal ...
    

You're missing a fundamental step in the software life cycle:  QA.

You're going to need to QA your application across the different
hardware platforms which means you're going to need to have that
hardware at your shop.  If you don't, you're asking for trouble.

You do the above whether you are using DB2, Oracle, etc.  It turns out
that DB2 leverages that QA hardware for application compilation.  :)
  

Only if it matters. Consider a situation where it is irrelevant. In other words ... where there are no
differences ... same source code, same compiled code. Then it is a minor consideration.

I missed nothing.

-- 
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)

Received on Fri Sep 19 2003 - 00:01:19 CEST