Re: Coke switches to DB2!!

Yep, work with both.  From a DBA/management perspective, they are still 
substantially different with the z/OS version being heavily influenced by 
mainframe considerations, and the LUW version attempting to mimic Oracle for 
all the wrong reasons.  From a developer perspective, things have improved 
greatly (though there are still differences).  IBM publish a cross-platform SQL 
guide, the stored proc languages are converging (though still some issues), 
libraries for all common languages are available, etc.

Generally, new features are tried out in one architecture, and then appear in 
the other architecture at version n+1.  The exception has been the z/OS data 
sharing feature (think RAC), which has been on the mainframe for decades.  It 
only just got the LUW equivalent this week - pureScale.  I'd expect to see some 
benchmark spanking happening (think RAC with hundreds of nodes each running at 
80% of full single-node power).

Ciao
Fuzzy
:-)


------------------------------------------------
Dazed and confused about technology for 20 years
http://fuzzydata.wordpress.com/


Bill Ferguson wrote:
Does anybody on here work with both Oracle and DB2?

I was wondering, merely for my own information (thankfully nobody has
ever suggested this), if what Tom Kyte wrote many years ago is still
applicable today
(http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:6495007510621886::::P11_QUESTION_ID:1886476148373)?

Specifically where he says:
"What DB2 do you use on all platforms?  Answer -- none, they have
different DB2's for different
architectures. (that report often seems to confuse things in DB2/OS390
with DB2/UDB -- "features
they've had for years", that OS390 -- UDB, totally different code
base, totally different
architecture."

Has IBM improved this 'initial' flaw, or is this still an issue with DB2?



--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l


Other related posts: