AW: Creating dds source from SQL Tables -- MIDRANGE-L

May be it's a little out of topic, but have you guys red the following
article:
When Pros Become Cons: The System i DBA 
http://www.systeminetwork.com/artarchive/20810/When_Pros_Become_Cons__The_Sy
stem_i_DBA.html


Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards

Birgitta Hauser

"Shoot for the moon, even if you miss, you'll land among the stars." (Les
Brown)
"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance." (Derek Bok)
"What is worse than training your staff and losing them?  Not training them
and keeping them!"

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: midrange-l-bounces+hauser=sss-software.de@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces+hauser=sss-software.de@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag
von Jerry Adams
Gesendet: Friday, February 16, 2007 14:14
An: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Betreff: Re: Creating dds source from SQL Tables


Dave Odom wrote:

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.

I have spoken with a couple of these people.  One is a former iSeries 
programmer now doing work for the last five years primarily in SQL 
Server, but with a significant amount of Oracle work.  His opinion of 
Oracle is that, while it may be good, Oracle has so many vendor 
extensions that it makes it difficult to interact with other databases 
and darn near impossible to convert.  DB2 is an industry standard, 
albeit with its own vendor extensions.

The other was an SQL Server dba.  He got pretty tired of me repeatedly 
tell him during a project that "Gee, we never have that kind of problem 
of the iSeries."  So he went on-line to get rebuttal data.  After a 
week, his comment was "That's damn good!"  Why is it that dba's are 
almost non-existent on a System i, but pretty much mandatory on other 
systems?

I took some university courses (the basic "SQL 101 and 102") on SQL 
Server back about five years ago.  After spending about five minutes 
learning the "new" nomenclature (libraries = schemas, etc.), there 
wasn't much to it.  Except for actual deployment, everything learned on 
an iSeries (except for Views, which were new to me) translated pretty 
much.  Aced the courses without having to do much studing (which is a 
good thing cause I'm a lazy s.o.b.).


        * Jerry C. Adams
*IBM System i5/iSeries Programmer/Analyst
B&W Wholesale Distributors, Inc.* *
voice
        615.995.7024
fax
        615.995.1201
email
        jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>