Re: db2 vs oracle

Comments in-line.

> 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.

Perhaps in the past. Certainly not with 10g.

> 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.

I absolutely agree. And make sure the consultant is equally familiar with both. A carpenter will favour a hammer even when confronted with a sheet metal screw.

-- 
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)