RE: Creating dds source from SQL Tables

["Paul Nelson" <nelsonp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dave,

If Oracle is the be all and end all of DBMS's why do people have so much
trouble implementing their software and why does that software require so
many DBA's?

Also, why does IBM have people on staff whose ONLY job is to assist
customers in coming back from Oracle?

Paul Nelson
Cell 708-670-6978
Office 708-425-4198
nelsonp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dave Odom
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 7:13 PM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Creating dds source from SQL Tables

Rob,
 
Sorry, but you are quite wrong about DB2/400 being an industry standard
RDBMS, PRIMARILY on its "ability" to do "traditional record access".  NO
ONE in the RDBMS industry considers it an industry standard.  Only those
that drink the Rochester cool-aid believe that.   Those from the real
DB2s and ORACLE, etc. would laugh at you after they found out what you
meant about "traditional record access" and how you consider DB2/400
industry standard.   They'd think you were out of the '70s or perhaps
the early '80s.  As to "extensions"... to the rest of the industry
standard RDBMS world, a back door of "traditional record access" is NOT
seen as an "extension" that allows DB2/400 to be considered industry
standard.  NO industry standard RDBMS uses any language or access except
SQL.   
 
Word to the wise if you talk to others using industry standard RDBM's,
like the real DB2s and ORACLE... don't tout nor brag about DB2/400's
traditional record access as you'll only embarrass yourself.  They don't
consider the platform nor its DB2 as a serious contender in the RDBMS
wars.   Think I'm wrong, go to a real DB2 convention and talk about DB2
on the 400  or an ORACLE convention and do the same and see how they
react. 
 
So, there's no "chest thumping" its just someone trying to help the i5
crowd see how they are seen from outside the "world" of the i5.   Great
platform... but to be taken seriously by those that pay the bills...
you've got to change to the majorities way of thinking and get out of
the past and "traditional record level access" just because you don't
want to convert to the standards used by the majority of the RDBMS
world. 
 
Sincerely,
 
David Odom