Re: Maria vs. DB2 performance on IBM i -- WEB400

Subject: Re: Maria vs. DB2 performance on IBM i
From: Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2020 10:20:29 -0700
List-archive: <https://archive.midrange.com/web400/>
List-help: <mailto:web400-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: "Web Enabling the IBM i \(AS/400 and iSeries\)" <web400.lists.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:web400@lists.midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/web400>, <mailto:web400-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/web400>, <mailto:web400-request@lists.midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 8:50 AM <midrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I am trying to decide with a newer web site if it's worth moving the data
into DB2 vs. leaving it in Maria.

When you say "leaving it in Maria", what storage engine are you referring
to (i.e. MyISAM, InnoDB, CSV)? My intuition says that using the IBMDB2i
storage engine would perform better than a storage engine that referenced a
bulk IFS file. But I haven't seen any benchmarks to prove it.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Maria vs. DB2 performance on IBM i , midrangel

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.