× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.




On 22/11/2007, at 10:42 AM, Dave Odom wrote:

I"m sure you're a nice person

I wouldn't be quite so sure. Those who think I'm nice can be counted on the fingers of one hand. The others ... well ...

Besides, which of the 14 (Shorter Oxford) definitions of nice do you mean? Not all of them are complimentary and many are contradictory. Personally, I like nice girls (definition 2) and I think definition 6 applies to me.

so no offense

Offence is in the eye (or ear) of the beholder. Life's too short to worry about what someone else might find offensive. If someone has a problem with something I say or do then that's their problem.

but your statements and attitude are typical of those that refuse to move into a real RDBMS world, keep the i5 from being seen as part of that world and a BIG reason why the i5 and its "DB2"/400 it is not taken seriously nor even often considered by those recommending systems to buy to those that write the checks. Because of that perception of the i5, its "database" and its supporter's attitudes about their "database machine" and in what language to do serious application development, it will go the way of OS/2 sooner rather than later. So,... the marketplace says your statements are nonsense and too much head in the sand about reality.

Just more nonsense. You saying DB2 UDB for System i is not a "real" database is as silly as Steve Richter's cost comparisons with pSeries. The current iSeries/System i implementation of DB2 is THE most compliant (as in ANSI standard) implementation of SQL available.

You seem to think that in order for iSeries/System i to be taken seriously we must throw away all existing applications and rewrite them using nothing but SQL stored procedures. No embedded SQL in RPG or COBOL or C. No I/O operation codes in RPG, COBOL, or C. In fact, no RPG, COBOL, or C applications at all. IBM should simply drop support for so-called "native I/O" and the compilers. If so then that's just rubbish. The definition of a database does not REQUIRE that SQL is the only DDL and DML. Nor does it REQUIRE that SQL be available. SQL is just the currently preferred, so-called standard, way of performing those functions.

I never said that YOU should use non-SQL access methods, nor did I say that SQL access methods should not be used, nor did I say that non-SQL access methods are better than SQL. I pointed out that HAVING non-SQL access methods available is an advantage and does NOT make the database non-relational. HAVING access statistics stored with the data container does not make the database non-relational. It is relational. The machine understands the relationships between tables (or physical files), views (or logical files), referential integrity, key constraints, etc. How the database is accessed has NO bearing on whether the underlying implementation is relational.

Your problem seems to be with so-called legacy applications for which the data has not been normalised and therefore you consider the system non-relational. Your problem seems to be that because the system allows such flat files to exist in the database it is not relational. Is that a correct summation of your views? If not then please state exactly what it is about DB2 UDB for iSeries that makes it non-relational and how that compares to a database you DO consider relational.

If so then it is a flawed view. I can create flat files using SQL on any database you care to name. Accessing such a file with SQL is problematic but not impossible given judicious use of substring and cast operators. So, because I can create a flat file database on Oracle do you consider Oracle non-relational or only the crappy flat file database I created?

How can a system with a built-in database be derided as non- relational by comparing it to other systems where the so-called database is an add-on that uses stream files as its data repository?

Stating that DB2 UDB for iSeries is non-relational just because a developer CAN create a flat database is rubbish.

As for comparing it to OS/2, well...

One of the major hurdles OS/2 had to recover from was support for Win3.1 applications. Supporting a Win3.1 run-time was a good idea but it had the side effect of creating a lack of compelling applications. Why? Because most vendors were too lazy to take advantage of the OS/2 native environment and settled for writing a Win3.1 application (for the WinDOS market) and then said they supported OS/2 because that same application ran under OS/2 (albeit in a Win3.1 run-time). Perhaps the astute among you can see parallels between this and PASE.

Further, IBM needed to actively MARKET OS/2 but they couldn't do that without upsetting Micros~1. IBM had a PC business that was dependent on being able to sell PCs with WinWhatever installed. I know Micros~1 threatened to increase the licence fee charged to IBM for WinDOS unless they shutup about OS/2. More dirty tricks from the MS marketing department (not that IBM is entirely clean in the dirty tricks department either).

Anyone see a parallel conflict of interest in the PC division trying to sell WinDOS and OS/2 when compared with a services organisation trying to sell a hardware + OS package that doesn't require a lot of services?

Regards,
Simon Coulter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
FlyByNight Software OS/400, i5/OS Technical Specialists

http://www.flybynight.com.au/
Phone: +61 2 6657 8251 Mobile: +61 0411 091 400 /"\
Fax: +61 2 6657 8251 \ /
X
ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail / \
--------------------------------------------------------------------




As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.