theory has been simplified too far, with the
result that it ends up far more complex than it need be.
Cheers,
Wol
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Jordan
Sent: 13 August 2008 01:18
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Why
David
As always, that is a great post.
Hit the nail on the head.
I think part of the problem is we continue to call UniVerse a database. It
isn't - it's an application platform that happens to have a complex storage
model behind it. When you compare *application* performance against the three
To add to my post:
If you want one single good reason, take a look at the Wrox Press Expert One to
One series books by Roger Jennings on database programming. He's a SQL Server
and .Net guru. Read his chapters on performance tuning and concurrency
management and weep for those guys.
And if
These questions have come up so many times I'm almost sick of hearing it. I
really wish that IBM would get off their duff and get some of these
questions answered. I just wonder why they don't run the tests against the
other databases. If their afraid to run them against DB2 for fear that their
David,
Don't forget to invoice IBM when they use this! ;)
Regards,
Ray
(presently in Japan,therefore missing U2 University)
- Original Message -
From: David Jordan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Why Buy (or develop in) UniVerse?
Date: Wed, 13
