Re: Which of the SYSIBM tables/views show the row count for

As if sweeping slanderous disparagements about the DB2 for i5/OS is objective? PERHAPS *that* group needs to "spend some time outside their world" of their /ivory tower/ view, with their claim on some definitive *reality* of RDBMS, so that *they* would "be able to do an objective comparison" against the DB2 for i5/OS; instead of snubbing other databases without knowing or understanding anything about them.

That a particular community [of people] is unfamiliar with another community, is often origin for formalized prejudice based on that lack of familiarity and lack of understanding of background. Thus their actions and words to disparage the DB2 for i5/OS, reflects nothing other than bigotry. What benefit is there to this community to be continually reminded that those other people hold an intolerant view? That is their problem, in their refusal to move beyond their preconceptions. That those thousands share the same view, does not make their view legitimate nor justified, especially if that shared view is based on ignorance.

Given the niche nature of the i5/OS, I doubt more than one percent of those sharing that opinion have even created an SQL application on the i5/OS, to even have an inkling about its object based integrated nature. That is, most likely they have just heard and adopted their negative view from another person similarly lacking in any actual individual experience. What legitimacy exists, in their judging something that they have no experience in? Being happy with knowing only what is being used and remaining ignorant of what else there is available, is commendable behavior as compared to knowing only what is being used and actively denigrating whatever else there is available.

I have personally heard over ten personal accounts of SQL people [developers and DBAs] moving from other databases onto the i5/OS, stating how wonderful it was to experience something so pleasant to work on by comparison to what they had to deal with on [name your favorite so-called /real/ RDBMS]. I also have personally heard from several people that left the i5/OS [each experienced in SQL and SQL programming; i.e. not DDS\ISAM people], and they _all_ bemoan the loss of the integrated database, having instead to suffer the constant stream of "please DBA could you do this", "please DBA do that", just to get and keep their applications functional. Generally things that either never had to be done nor to be concerned with using the DB2 for i5/OS, had become constant nagging points in the database they moved to. Thus I know of sufficient counter examples to the implied position that so many claim "the DB2 for i5/OS is not a real database", from people experiencing both. Those people experiencing both are happier with the DB2 for i5/OS, so I can conclude there is a portrayal of negativity, that must be at least somewhat off-base. If the DB2 for i5/OS were not a real RDBMS, they would have been unable to get their job done using the database. They are happy because they *are* getting things done, and in their description, without so much pain. Additionally I have not personally heard an opposite claim stated, ever, for such transitions between DB2 for i5/OS and another database. Note: There is the occasional poster to c.s.i.a.m who gives themselves away as a troll; so I have seen complaints from them, but with little substance, and ignoring every valid response and resolutions to any argument and false claim, harping endlessly not just the integrated database but that the entire system since its inception was a failure as a computing platform; thus, why I reference only what I personally have heard from people, and ignoring any baseless rants. Most other claims are just syntax and lack of or nuances in differences in function, which is a fact that spans all databases; i.e. some can do X, some can not do Y, some do Z differently.

You assure us that _they_ will not change their views unless the DB2 for i5/OS narrows its view, by eliminating at least one of the features that makes it better than other databases; row level access. Since removing that is an option completely _incompatible_ with the i5/OS, please just get over it, as that is almost surely never going to happen. There is then, an impasse.

Anyhow if any of the /real/ RDBMS _vendors_ share that attitude in thinking that i5/OS is lacking a real database, then they should port their database to the i5/OS. They can then hope to prove their point; all the lost souls on i5/OS can finally find out what they have been missing, and start using the real RDBMS as an alternative to the DB2 for i5/OS. All of the bigots then also use the i5/OS, reinforcing their prejudice by using their preferred database while ignoring the DB2 for i5/OS. IBM can even sell them an Application Server Edition of the i5/OS at a lower cost, since they will not be using the integrated DB2.

Regards, Chuck