Re: Temporal support in DB2 for i - a perspective

Vern,

I agree that yes IBM is working very hard to deliver change to the IBM i,
and these changes don't come out of thin air. Same as many other big
players. I have more skin in the game on the Microsoft Side of things, so I
could share similar stories there.

Its great that IBM has a degree of transparency, and lets COMMON host a
mechanism for feature requests. I think though that pushing for more
transparency, is a good thing, and would make us more patient.

The Microsoft ASP.NET team has a weekly standup meeting that is publicly
broadcast (https://live.asp.net/). Now I'm sure a lot of that information
is vetted. However, that covers a large swath of the Microsoft Stack, and
its a radical level of transparency.

So yes I agree, we need to be patient, reasonable, and polite in our
feedback mechanisms. We need to be aware that there aren't thousands of
people in Rochester working on the OS, its a handful. We also need to
remember the almighty dollar dictates a lot. A few really large customers
wanting a feature will get it implemented.

However, at the same time, we need to push for more transparency. Some
stuff will be NDA. I mean Microsoft's recent announcements of SQL Server on
Linux and Ubuntu subsystem were super NDA. However, for something like
temporal tables, when its a matter of LUW and z/OS has something when do we
get feature parity, that makes perfect sense for "we're working on that"
levels of transparency

Justin.

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 8:53 AM Vernon Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

I was looking at some requirements today on the CAAC site (not public,
sorry, due to NDA issues).

There was a requirement asking for temporal support to be added, dated
last June, that we brought over from COMMON, #347.

And now we have it - which is very cool!

So I want to suggest a perspective to this - maybe everyone gets this,
and maybe not.

1. At the time the requirement showed up on COMMON, we brought it over
to CAAC - we knew that temporal support had been planned for some time
and took the opportunity to join the fray and be able to report
something delivered by IBM.

2. I mentioned "planned for some time" - on a personal front, I attended
meetings with IBM when working for and ISV, and temporal support was
brought up __at least 4 years__ ago.

So a perspective - IBM are delivering things in what looks faster and
more responsive to industry changes - some of these have been planned
for some time, others are done more quickly - see the OPS open source
offering now. The teams are finding ways to be more responsive to our
rapidly-changing world.

So to add, I suggest we remember that new features and capabilities
don't just pop out of thin air - they've been on the table sometimes for
several years. A thing like temporal support required underlying support
to change, as I recall, so when it can be delivered depends on other
parts of the platform. It could not be done with a technology refresh,
had to be a major release change. And there is always the issue of
resources available to do the work.

Let us keep a broader view of what IBM announces - I guess that's the
bottom line I've come to, both from being inside the walls for a year in
2001, testing the new query engine, and having the privilege to serve on
a couple councils and hearing something about the decision process
involved.

Thoughts?
Vern
--
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.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.