The DB2 engine on i was never more than a half baked attempt to link MySql to DB2. You can not use existing tables with MySql, nor can you use tables defined with DDS or SQL/400. They have to be defined through MySql. Granted there isn't a DB2 for i storage engine for Postgres, but you really aren't loosing all that much as long as you can get it to work in PASE. If Oracle is going to try to make MySQL just a stepping stone to Oracle DB, then they will never allow it to become fully featured for DB2, and they may even take away some existing features, or avoid adding features in the future. Hey, Oracle has not proven to be a strong open source supporter.
Mark Murphy
STAR BASE Consulting, Inc.
mmurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: -----
To: Web Enabling the AS400 / iSeries <web400@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Vern Hamberg
Sent by: web400-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 12/18/2010 05:01PM
Subject: Re: [WEB400] MySQL and DB2 storage engine for IBM i
Good question - the DB2 engine on i for mySql was just that - a way to
store data defined in mySql in a different way. Postgresql is
self-contained, so far as I know. Does it have plugins for storage
engines that are similar to what mySql has? If not, there's no reason to
go with it. The mySql effort seems related to PHP, et al. The engine
made is possible to read mySql data in native programs. Again, no
similar purpose exists with any other RDBMS that I'm aware of.
Regards
Vern
On 12/18/2010 2:21 PM, Thorbjoern Ravn Andersen wrote:
-snip-
Why would you choose PostgreSQL instead of DB2/400 which works out of
the box?
/Thorbjørn
midrange.com
