I think what he is asking for are tips and tricks, example programs, troubleshooting guides with real world scenarios, how to get data in and out of other database from the U2 side as well as from the other side with examples. Books written in a conversational manner not in techno geek I'm leaving out the stuff you should already know because I do.
-----Original Message----- From: Brutzman, Bill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 12:07 PM To: '[email protected]' Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance The following eMail is not clear to me. IBM has comprehensive documentation on U2 available for free. What (specifically) is being sought that is not now available? --BIll -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Smith, Robert Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 9:14 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance Good Morning, I really enjoyed reading this thread. I can honestly say that the diversity of experiences and people who comprise this listserv is amazing. And I've found the shared knowledge to be invaluable. As one who has not been immersed in the U2 environment for an extended period of time, there is one item that serves as a continued source of frustration. And it's exactly what Phil mentions below...sparse documentation. Not only for new stuff, but also for what I consider to be "general items". More than once I have had a problem and through research, found that a PDF containing possibly pertinent information could be obtained from the IBM web site. Knowing it was there did me absolutely no good at all. Because my connection to the U2 world is through our software vendor, IBM has consistently refused to acknowledge/honor any request that I've made for information. And based upon the feedback I have gotten at times from the vendors support center, they (the support center) has a equ! ally difficult time extracting U2 information from IBM. And it's not like there are selves full of books on U2 that I could turn to for research...at least not that I've seen. I can go to any major book store and find two or three selves of books on MS SQL and NONE on U2. This was particularly frustrating when I was first getting started with U2 four years ago. "How could there be no books?" Regardless of the bookstores I've visited over the years, the results has always been the same. I have since learned that, outside of spending thousands of dollars to go to vendor sponsored "training" classes (and receiving their training books), the best way to learn about things in this environment is through the listservs...word of mouth...trial and error. For one who has spent a considerable amount of time (with past systems I've supported) over the years plowing through technical manuals learning the nuances of how to best work with a product, being denied that information is very ! frustrating. The only consolation are listserves such as this one. The U2 industry is ill served by what I perceive to be an informational void relative to the product. And the tragedy is that this is a really good family of products. Very worthy of recognition along with the other major players in the RDBMS arena. Something should be done to free up this log-jam. And the first thing that would be really helpful is if IBM allowed both their direct customers AND the clients of those customers (such as myself), direct access to all aspects of the critical information contained upon their web site. Maybe then people will start writing books about U2. My two cents, Rob -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of phil walker Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 4:22 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance Nick, Here, here to your following statements.... To me, this is part of the problem that we have in the MV world. We look at how things are being done elsewhere and say, "Pick does it better, we aren't going to do that." The problem with this approach is that everyone else is adopting these standards and using them. We are going to be left further behind if we don't start using some of the technologies available to us. ..... And this is where this list breaks down in that a lot of the new features IBM are building into the product are not used/discussed and the documentation is VERY, VERY sparse. So people like myself and a few others are left to trial and error techniques to implement these new technologies because we HAVE to talk to the outside world and people expect some sort of standard method to do this. Because of this approach we take a lot longer to do something which I am sure is reasonably easy if one was to have good quality examples available like most other dbms/development environments have on the web.... Phil (my 2c) Nick Cipollina -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 11:22 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance I do understand the advantages to that approach, Nick. But that was also the thinking of those who prepared the current industry benchmarks by locking in on SQL. My concern was that if you specify technologies, you can make it difficult for solutions that are outside the box. --dawn On 7/16/07, Nick Cipollina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If the consumer of this data is going to be external, then I would > definitely use web services. Using a standard format (SOAP) will make > it possible for anyone to consume the data. > > Thanks, > > Nick Cipollina > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dawn Wolthuis > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 4:58 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [U2] UniData 7.1 vs. MS SQL 2005 performance > > Yes, agreed. I think if you start with user requirements for services, > then have folks design for those requirements according to each > environment, that would be a good start. I hesitate to say that it > must be "web services" only because that might imply use of SOAP or an > XML exchange that could prejudice the implementation, but otherwise > defining the requirements as services makes a lot of sense. Each > service implementation in different environments can then be judged > and compared by a variety of measures. <snip> ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
