RE: DB2

["Carel Teijgeler" <coteijgeler@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just my 2 Eurocents on this topic.

the old DDS-based file structure cannot be called relational in the context as 
it used here to a RDB.

And it is my opinion that IBM did not renamed the old integrated RDBM system 
within the OS to DB/2: IBM ported DB/2 to the AS/400. Because if the old RDBM 
system and DB/2 are the same, why is not DDS enhanced with the new data types?

Calling the old RDBM of the AS/400 DB/2 is therefore a mistake, because DB/2 
relies more on SQL than the old RDBM system.

With SQL you work with a database, which is a collection of tables. To get the 
relationality between those tables you use referential integrity rules with 
constraints and triggers.

Regards,
Carel Teijgeler.


*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 13-3-03 at 10:34 Andy Nolen-Parkhouse wrote:

>Richard,
>
>The relational database has been part of the OS/400 operating system
>since day one (1988).  Before that it was part of CPF on the S/38.  I
>have forgotten when IBM started applying the DB2 label to it, but really
>it has always been there.  They are trying a little harder these days to
>keep it functionally current with IBM's other DB2 offerings.
>
>It is not an option; it is part of the OS.
>
>Regards,
>Andy Nolen-Parkhouse
>
>> On Behalf Of Richard Reeve
>> Subject: DB2
>> 
>> How many years has the 400 been using db2?  Is that an option or is it
>> the database management software that every machine is shipped with?
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>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.