RE: Question about UDB on iSeries

More information from your point of view would be nice.

Bruce Barrett


-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dave Odom
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 12:13 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Question about UDB on iSeries

John, 

You wrote:

>>> Please keep in mind that I know **ZERO** about the iSeries and UDB.
We are considering a conversion from z/OS on zSeries to i5OS on
iSeries..."  <<<

Well, I thought I'd through in my two cents worth since I've been
involved in the following areas of work using the real DB2 RDBMs built
for VM, VSE, and MVS, and the version called DB2/2 on the OS/2 operating
system, and the pseudo-DB2 on the iSeries as well as another highly used
RDBMs, called Oracle:  System Programming, DBA, DA, consultant to
developers of applications using those RBDMS and Director of a
development shop creating multi-terabyte data warehouses using both
DB2/MVS and Oracle.  I even go back to the days of the S/38 and  S/34. 


I don't say this to impress but I just didn't see any responses from
folks that have worked with DB2 in the mainframe environment nor other
mid-range industry-accepted RDBMs used on a wide scale, like Oracle.  It
seems like most of the responses are from folks that are prejudiced to
the iSeries and perhaps have limited knowledge of the real DB2.  Don't
get me wrong, I think the iSeries is a find operating system and is
pretty rock solid, BUT the reality is, it and DB2 are not usually used
in the same environments and for the same types of applications and
reasons as the mainframe.  There are reasons why mainframe shops and
mid-range shops using RDMBs like DB2 and Oracle went with those engines
and platforms and not with the iSeries.  If you understand that, you can
understand why there are not many non-OEM tools for the iSeries vs. the
mainframe and other mid-range boxes like those that run Oracle.   

In addition, most iSeries shops I know of, since they have been
influenced by Rochester and tend to move only in that environment and
have done so for decades, don't have an unbiased view of how different
the DB2/400 implementation is from the rest of IBM and why that is not
necessarily good.   And, from my point of view, it seems that most
iSeries shops that fool with DB2/400 do so from the traditional S/38,
AS/400 legacy point of view spoken about earlier and that is not a wise
use of a resource.  IBM is also part of the problem because of the way
they implemented DB2 on the AS/400 because of the operating system
architecture.  One of the questions that should be answered is, "but
with all that, can DB2/400 be used wisely and in keeping with the tenets
usually found in the rest of the RDBMs world and why is that important
to my business?"  That question should also peak the interest of the
lagecy AS/400/iSeries technical folks as well especially if they see
their world shrinking relative to the expansion of other worlds that use
RDBMs.  Let me know if you'd like to explore this further.  

Take care,

Dave    

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.