|
> From: Paul Raulerson > > Oh, there are a *couple* of places - for example, as a pure > database server, a comparable UNIX server will beat a 400 in speed and > accessibility (using DB/2). This tends to bolster my opinion that turning the AS/400 into an SQL server is probably not a good idea. > If you are in a streams oriented > environment, such as a system running multiple socket based servers, > UNIX is probably a bit more efficient. (Not to say that a 400 > cannot do it, just that a $2500 > UNIX machine will do it better than an $8K 400.) I agree. I think Dr. Nicholson's situation is one where relational data acess is required, though, considering the fact that Oracle is in the mix. > And it depends on other factors too. But in *general* - a UNIX > server will outperform an AS/400 in > a streams environment, and a 400 will outperform UNIX is a record > oriented environment. And so if the AS/400 was originally doing what it is designed to do - perform record-oriented business logic - then I wonder whether the move to Unix will be successful. And that's what I hope Dr. Nicholson will tell us. Joe
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.