Re: db2 vs oracle

Mike <mikee_at_mikee.ath.cx> wrote in message news:<10ipe6fjjr7k156_at_corp.supernews.com>...
> No flame wars, please!
>
> We're planning a move from a non-relational system to
> a relational system. Our choices have been narrowed to
> Oracle and DB2. Since we're moving from non-relational
> to relational, then we're not currently using any
> relational-type operators. So I expect the end result to
> use simple, SQL standard commands and queries.
>
> The question: At the SQL standard level is there any
> appreciable difference between Oracle and DB2.
>
> Example: I know that Oracle has cascading deletes. We're
> not using them now so I don't expect to use them with the
> new system.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Mike

at the sql syntax level, there's not much difference Ov10 vs. DB2v8.

on the other hand: oracle and db2 use diametrically opposite concurrency
mechanisms. oracle is said to require more husbanding than oracle. on
the other hand, 390 db2 is just as needy. oracle is said to be a dog on
the 390 (at least by blue folk). oracle is pretty much the same on any platform. db2 is pretty much different on any platform. oracle has
most of the mindshare on *nix (except AIX, natch), and it's largest install segment. it doesn't exist (IIRC) on AS/400.

there are studies which show Total Cost of Ownership to be higher with oracle. ditto db2.

your biggest effort, should you choose to do so (most COBOL/VSAM folk don't), is defining a relational structure which balances the concurrency
stuff you get free in a (R)DBMS with the existing code base, which was/will be doing it too. you'll need to decide. if you use the DB concurrency stuff, you should remove it from the code. if you leave it
in the code, you'll get it from the DB anyway, and performance could be
anywhere from a little worse to in the toilet. depends.

hire a consultant. one that has documented experience with systems on your platform and oracle and db2 on that platform. it's your only hope. Received on Thu Aug 26 2004 - 16:16:03 CEST