Re: *** END OF THREAD *** Oh, dear, Mr Oliver - havent you learnt yet... Put it in the subject line, dear boy! RE: The future of U2
Apparently not. Sorry! -- Regards, Clif On Apr 15, 2004, at 2:42, Dennis Bartlett wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Clif Oliver Sent: 15 April 2004 03:10 To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: Re: The future of U2 *** END OF THREAD *** DO NOT REPLY TO THIS THREAD ANY FURTHER (That means *anyone* not just the poster of the message used for the Moderator reply) On Apr 14, 2004, at 13:39, Tom Firl wrote: U2 TO DB2 ---> Best thing to Happen. H... I don't think I'll touch that one other than to say that only time will tell. Tom Firl Columbia Ultimate -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
*** END OF THREAD *** Oh, dear, Mr Oliver - havent you learnt yet... Put it in the subject line, dear boy! RE: The future of U2
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Clif Oliver Sent: 15 April 2004 03:10 To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: Re: The future of U2 *** END OF THREAD *** DO NOT REPLY TO THIS THREAD ANY FURTHER (That means *anyone* not just the poster of the message used for the Moderator reply) On Apr 14, 2004, at 13:39, Tom Firl wrote: >> >> U2 TO DB2 ---> Best thing to Happen. > > H... I don't think I'll touch that one other than to say that only > time will tell. > > Tom Firl > Columbia Ultimate > -- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
>> U2 TO DB2 ---> Best thing to Happen. >> >> Hopefully IBM will start integrating all IBM DB's into Flagship RDBMS UDB. >> >> Joe Eugene BOY! OH! BOY!This lad sure is a flamethrower. Wotsa matta boy, you have a bad childhood? Someone drown yer puppy? Wet the bed last night? You really got it bad. Why don't you let us all play in our sandpit, an' you go play in yer's... Yer cess pool, that is! -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
I thought this was done "behind the scenes" ? For our part we are looking with interest at what comes out of the mix in terms of XML & databases over the next 18 months or so from the "big 3" - Oracle, SQL Server & DB2. If we get these facilities "natively" from U2 (or another mv player), great. If not, then we have "Plan V" :-) Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage – an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Steve Mayo >Sent: Thursday, 15 April 2004 4:01 AM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: RE: The future of U2 > >The way that jBase handles the problem is by requiring the database be >flattened out (i.e., no multivalues) and strict data typing. This is of >course the standard with 1NF databases. Unfortunately for most of us, it >means a complete redesign of the existing mv database structure. Over the >past several years, all new systems that I have developed have used 1NF. >Still most of the data still uses multivalues and would take years to >convert. :-) > >Steve > > >>Implementation wise, I think there are some "right" and "wrong" decisions >that could be made. One of the "biggies" has to do with data typing, and >the "common" practice multiply defining a field for different purposes - >you know the drill - <1> might be a date, or a null, or some kind of flag. >> >>This would obviously have an impact on the ability to "get at" data with >SQL - assuming that records aren't stored as "blob/glob" as some products >do. >> >>The message in this I suppose is to make sure that your database is >"tight" if you are looking at walking down this path and before you >say "we never do that", take a good, hard look at any temporary work files >your application might use as an intermediate staging point !! >> >>Ross Ferris >>Stamina Software >>Visage – an Evolution in Software Development >> >> >>>-Original Message- >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>>Behalf Of Dawn M. Wolthuis >>>Sent: Thursday, 15 April 2004 3:30 AM >>>To: 'U2 Users Discussion List' >>>Subject: RE: The future of U2 >>> >>>I don't know the answer to this, but the picture in my head would permit >>>SQL >>>against the DB2 structures directly, so I'm guessing that will help for >>>anyone requiring SQL. >>> >>>More importantly for the future, it will be important that anyone using >>>this >>>model be able to use their DB2 data through the multivalue/XML-model U2 >>>view >>>of the data. It would be a shame to take the data that is in non-1NF, >then >>>implement it in a 1NF model (which they might not be doing since DB2 has >>>some other possibilities?) and then extract it into a non-1NF format for >>>web >>>services, for example. Direct U2<-->XML would be much smarter, I would >>>think. >>> >>>--dawn >>> >>>Dawn M. Wolthuis >>>Tincat Group, Inc. >>>www.tincat-group.com >>> >>>Take and give some delight today. >>> >>> >>>-Original Message- >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>>Behalf Of Tom Firl >>>Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:27 AM >>>To: U2 Users Discussion List >>>Subject: RE: The future of U2 >>> >>>Has any one heard any specifics about the implementation? I'd be >>>interested >>>in knowing whether or not Universe applications using DB2 as a data store >>>will require setting up a Universe SQL schema. I'm supposing that it >>>will... >>> >>>Tom Firl >>>Columbia Ultimate >>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: Roger Glenfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:21 PM >>>> To: U2 Users Discussion List >>>> Subject: RE: The future of U2 >>>> >>>> >>>> I believe the wording was DB2 and then others based on 'demand'. >>>> >>>> Roger >>>> >>>> > -Original Message- >>>> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> > Behalf Of Ross Ferris >>>> > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:06 PM >>>> > To: U2 Users Discussion List >>>> > Subject: RE:
Re: The future of U2
*** END OF THREAD *** DO NOT REPLY TO THIS THREAD ANY FURTHER (That means *anyone* not just the poster of the message used for the Moderator reply) On Apr 14, 2004, at 13:45, Gordon Glorfield wrote: I don't really care what the backend DB engine is as long as I can use my favorite set of tools to develop applications. But if a change to DB2 or whatever is going to force me to severly change the way I operate, then I'd see that as a bad thing. Gordon J. Glorfield Sr. Applications Developer MAMSI (A UnitedHealth Company) 301-360-8839 This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: The future of U2
*** END OF THREAD *** DO NOT REPLY TO THIS THREAD ANY FURTHER (That means *anyone* not just the poster of the message used for the Moderator reply) On Apr 14, 2004, at 13:39, Tom Firl wrote: U2 TO DB2 ---> Best thing to Happen. H... I don't think I'll touch that one other than to say that only time will tell. Tom Firl Columbia Ultimate -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
[ADMIN] Re: The future of U2
OK, Joe. So you subscribed under a different address to get around having your inflammatory postings moderated. That is a clear act of unwillingness to cooperate with the policies of this list. buh-bye *** END OF THREAD *** DO NOT REPLY TO THIS THREAD ANY FURTHER (That means *anyone* not just the poster of the message used for the Moderator reply) On Apr 14, 2004, at 12:36, Joe Eugene wrote: U2 TO DB2 ---> Best thing to Happen. Hopefully IBM will start integrating all IBM DB's into Flagship RDBMS UDB. Joe Eugene -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Glenfield Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:21 PM To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: RE: The future of U2 I believe the wording was DB2 and then others based on 'demand'. Roger -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ross Ferris Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:06 PM To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: RE: The future of U2 I'd also think that rather than "any" database, the target would be DB2 :-) Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage - an Evolution in Software Development http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
Yes, an RDBMS is still a costly investment for any company and that won't change by front-ending it with what is otherwise bigger-bang-for-the-buck software. The way DB2 does constraint-handling, strong-typing, NULL-handling, etc are likely to be reasons to stick with what works and doesn't require additional staffing. Relational databases are the king of the hill now, but they are definitely more concerned about their rear view mirror than they have been in the past couple of decades and in that rear view mirror are some sights that would make me think twice before any investment in any SQL-based products. But, well, that's just an opinion. Smiles. --dawn Dawn M. Wolthuis Tincat Group, Inc. www.tincat-group.com Take and give some delight today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ross Ferris Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 6:57 PM To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: RE: The future of U2 Implementation wise, I think there are some "right" and "wrong" decisions that could be made. One of the "biggies" has to do with data typing, and the "common" practice multiply defining a field for different purposes - you know the drill - <1> might be a date, or a null, or some kind of flag. This would obviously have an impact on the ability to "get at" data with SQL - assuming that records aren't stored as "blob/glob" as some products do. The message in this I suppose is to make sure that your database is "tight" if you are looking at walking down this path and before you say "we never do that", take a good, hard look at any temporary work files your application might use as an intermediate staging point !! Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage - an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Dawn M. Wolthuis >Sent: Thursday, 15 April 2004 3:30 AM >To: 'U2 Users Discussion List' >Subject: RE: The future of U2 > >I don't know the answer to this, but the picture in my head would permit >SQL >against the DB2 structures directly, so I'm guessing that will help for >anyone requiring SQL. > >More importantly for the future, it will be important that anyone using >this >model be able to use their DB2 data through the multivalue/XML-model U2 >view >of the data. It would be a shame to take the data that is in non-1NF, then >implement it in a 1NF model (which they might not be doing since DB2 has >some other possibilities?) and then extract it into a non-1NF format for >web >services, for example. Direct U2<-->XML would be much smarter, I would >think. > >--dawn > >Dawn M. Wolthuis >Tincat Group, Inc. >www.tincat-group.com > >Take and give some delight today. > > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Tom Firl >Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:27 AM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: RE: The future of U2 > >Has any one heard any specifics about the implementation? I'd be >interested >in knowing whether or not Universe applications using DB2 as a data store >will require setting up a Universe SQL schema. I'm supposing that it >will... > >Tom Firl >Columbia Ultimate > >> -Original Message- >> From: Roger Glenfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:21 PM >> To: U2 Users Discussion List >> Subject: RE: The future of U2 >> >> >> I believe the wording was DB2 and then others based on 'demand'. >> >> Roger >> >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > Behalf Of Ross Ferris >> > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:06 PM >> > To: U2 Users Discussion List >> > Subject: RE: The future of U2 >> > >> > >> > I'd also think that rather than "any" database, the target would >> > be DB2 :-) >> > >> > Ross Ferris >> > Stamina Software >> > Visage - an Evolution in Software Development >> > >> > >> > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> >> >> -- >> u2-users mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
The way that jBase handles the problem is by requiring the database be flattened out (i.e., no multivalues) and strict data typing. This is of course the standard with 1NF databases. Unfortunately for most of us, it means a complete redesign of the existing mv database structure. Over the past several years, all new systems that I have developed have used 1NF. Still most of the data still uses multivalues and would take years to convert. :-) Steve >Implementation wise, I think there are some "right" and "wrong" decisions that could be made. One of the "biggies" has to do with data typing, and the "common" practice multiply defining a field for different purposes - you know the drill - <1> might be a date, or a null, or some kind of flag. > >This would obviously have an impact on the ability to "get at" data with SQL - assuming that records aren't stored as "blob/glob" as some products do. > >The message in this I suppose is to make sure that your database is "tight" if you are looking at walking down this path and before you say "we never do that", take a good, hard look at any temporary work files your application might use as an intermediate staging point !! > >Ross Ferris >Stamina Software >Visage an Evolution in Software Development > > >>-Original Message- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>Behalf Of Dawn M. Wolthuis >>Sent: Thursday, 15 April 2004 3:30 AM >>To: 'U2 Users Discussion List' >>Subject: RE: The future of U2 >> >>I don't know the answer to this, but the picture in my head would permit >>SQL >>against the DB2 structures directly, so I'm guessing that will help for >>anyone requiring SQL. >> >>More importantly for the future, it will be important that anyone using >>this >>model be able to use their DB2 data through the multivalue/XML-model U2 >>view >>of the data. It would be a shame to take the data that is in non-1NF, then >>implement it in a 1NF model (which they might not be doing since DB2 has >>some other possibilities?) and then extract it into a non-1NF format for >>web >>services, for example. Direct U2<-->XML would be much smarter, I would >>think. >> >>--dawn >> >>Dawn M. Wolthuis >>Tincat Group, Inc. >>www.tincat-group.com >> >>Take and give some delight today. >> >> >>-Original Message- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>Behalf Of Tom Firl >>Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:27 AM >>To: U2 Users Discussion List >>Subject: RE: The future of U2 >> >>Has any one heard any specifics about the implementation? I'd be >>interested >>in knowing whether or not Universe applications using DB2 as a data store >>will require setting up a Universe SQL schema. I'm supposing that it >>will... >> >>Tom Firl >>Columbia Ultimate >> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Roger Glenfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:21 PM >>> To: U2 Users Discussion List >>> Subject: RE: The future of U2 >>> >>> >>> I believe the wording was DB2 and then others based on 'demand'. >>> >>> Roger >>> >>> > -Original Message- >>> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> > Behalf Of Ross Ferris >>> > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:06 PM >>> > To: U2 Users Discussion List >>> > Subject: RE: The future of U2 >>> > >>> > >>> > I'd also think that rather than "any" database, the target would >>> > be DB2 :-) >>> > >>> > Ross Ferris >>> > Stamina Software >>> > Visage - an Evolution in Software Development >>> > >>> > >>> > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >>> >>> >>> -- >>> u2-users mailing list >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >>> >>-- >>u2-users mailing list >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> >>-- >>u2-users mailing list >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> >> >>--- >>Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >>Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 >> > >--- >Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 > >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
Implementation wise, I think there are some "right" and "wrong" decisions that could be made. One of the "biggies" has to do with data typing, and the "common" practice multiply defining a field for different purposes - you know the drill - <1> might be a date, or a null, or some kind of flag. This would obviously have an impact on the ability to "get at" data with SQL - assuming that records aren't stored as "blob/glob" as some products do. The message in this I suppose is to make sure that your database is "tight" if you are looking at walking down this path and before you say "we never do that", take a good, hard look at any temporary work files your application might use as an intermediate staging point !! Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage – an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Dawn M. Wolthuis >Sent: Thursday, 15 April 2004 3:30 AM >To: 'U2 Users Discussion List' >Subject: RE: The future of U2 > >I don't know the answer to this, but the picture in my head would permit >SQL >against the DB2 structures directly, so I'm guessing that will help for >anyone requiring SQL. > >More importantly for the future, it will be important that anyone using >this >model be able to use their DB2 data through the multivalue/XML-model U2 >view >of the data. It would be a shame to take the data that is in non-1NF, then >implement it in a 1NF model (which they might not be doing since DB2 has >some other possibilities?) and then extract it into a non-1NF format for >web >services, for example. Direct U2<-->XML would be much smarter, I would >think. > >--dawn > >Dawn M. Wolthuis >Tincat Group, Inc. >www.tincat-group.com > >Take and give some delight today. > > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Tom Firl >Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:27 AM >To: U2 Users Discussion List >Subject: RE: The future of U2 > >Has any one heard any specifics about the implementation? I'd be >interested >in knowing whether or not Universe applications using DB2 as a data store >will require setting up a Universe SQL schema. I'm supposing that it >will... > >Tom Firl >Columbia Ultimate > >> -Original Message- >> From: Roger Glenfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:21 PM >> To: U2 Users Discussion List >> Subject: RE: The future of U2 >> >> >> I believe the wording was DB2 and then others based on 'demand'. >> >> Roger >> >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > Behalf Of Ross Ferris >> > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:06 PM >> > To: U2 Users Discussion List >> > Subject: RE: The future of U2 >> > >> > >> > I'd also think that rather than "any" database, the target would >> > be DB2 :-) >> > >> > Ross Ferris >> > Stamina Software >> > Visage - an Evolution in Software Development >> > >> > >> > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> >> >> -- >> u2-users mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users >> >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: The future of U2
>2. The data is converted into two dimensional databases, requiring data >typing, length definitions, etc. Dirty data will be an issue that can >be covered a number of ways. The data will still look multi dimensional >to the application. PostgreSQL supports multidimensional arrays, so perhaps DB2 does too and each MV record will become a single 3 dimensional text field? Craig -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
There are a variety of ways that this can be achieved. 1. the records are stored in the relational database as a raw string including value marks etc. This is meaningless data to DB2 users. 2. The data is converted into two dimensional databases, requiring data typing, length definitions, etc. Dirty data will be an issue that can be covered a number of ways. The data will still look multi dimensional to the application. The index data and dictionary will likely stay in universe. For performance the record locking will probably remain in Universe, meaning there can be no updating from the DB2 side or there will be corruption. RDBMS cannot handle row locking as efficiently as PICK. Regards David Jordan Managing Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dacono Holdings Pty Ltd Business & Technology Consulting PO Box 909 Lane Cove NSW 2066 Australia Ph 61 2 9418 8329 Fax 61 2 9427 2371 www.dacono.com.au -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon Glorfield Sent: Thursday, 15 April 2004 6:45 AM To: 'U2 Users Discussion List' Subject: RE: The future of U2 I don't really care what the backend DB engine is as long as I can use my favorite set of tools to develop applications. But if a change to DB2 or whatever is going to force me to severly change the way I operate, then I'd see that as a bad thing. Gordon J. Glorfield Sr. Applications Developer MAMSI (A UnitedHealth Company) 301-360-8839 This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
I don't really care what the backend DB engine is as long as I can use my favorite set of tools to develop applications. But if a change to DB2 or whatever is going to force me to severly change the way I operate, then I'd see that as a bad thing. Gordon J. Glorfield Sr. Applications Developer MAMSI (A UnitedHealth Company) 301-360-8839 This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
> > U2 TO DB2 ---> Best thing to Happen. H... I don't think I'll touch that one other than to say that only time will tell. Tom Firl Columbia Ultimate -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
U2 TO DB2 ---> Best thing to Happen. Hopefully IBM will start integrating all IBM DB's into Flagship RDBMS UDB. Joe Eugene > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Roger Glenfield > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:21 PM > To: U2 Users Discussion List > Subject: RE: The future of U2 > > I believe the wording was DB2 and then others based on 'demand'. > > Roger > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Behalf Of Ross Ferris > > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:06 PM > > To: U2 Users Discussion List > > Subject: RE: The future of U2 > > > > > > I'd also think that rather than "any" database, the target would > > be DB2 :-) > > > > Ross Ferris > > Stamina Software > > Visage - an Evolution in Software Development > > > > > > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > > -- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
I don't know the answer to this, but the picture in my head would permit SQL against the DB2 structures directly, so I'm guessing that will help for anyone requiring SQL. More importantly for the future, it will be important that anyone using this model be able to use their DB2 data through the multivalue/XML-model U2 view of the data. It would be a shame to take the data that is in non-1NF, then implement it in a 1NF model (which they might not be doing since DB2 has some other possibilities?) and then extract it into a non-1NF format for web services, for example. Direct U2<-->XML would be much smarter, I would think. --dawn Dawn M. Wolthuis Tincat Group, Inc. www.tincat-group.com Take and give some delight today. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Firl Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:27 AM To: U2 Users Discussion List Subject: RE: The future of U2 Has any one heard any specifics about the implementation? I'd be interested in knowing whether or not Universe applications using DB2 as a data store will require setting up a Universe SQL schema. I'm supposing that it will... Tom Firl Columbia Ultimate > -Original Message- > From: Roger Glenfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:21 PM > To: U2 Users Discussion List > Subject: RE: The future of U2 > > > I believe the wording was DB2 and then others based on 'demand'. > > Roger > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Behalf Of Ross Ferris > > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:06 PM > > To: U2 Users Discussion List > > Subject: RE: The future of U2 > > > > > > I'd also think that rather than "any" database, the target would > > be DB2 :-) > > > > Ross Ferris > > Stamina Software > > Visage - an Evolution in Software Development > > > > > > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > > -- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
Has any one heard any specifics about the implementation? I'd be interested in knowing whether or not Universe applications using DB2 as a data store will require setting up a Universe SQL schema. I'm supposing that it will... Tom Firl Columbia Ultimate > -Original Message- > From: Roger Glenfield [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:21 PM > To: U2 Users Discussion List > Subject: RE: The future of U2 > > > I believe the wording was DB2 and then others based on 'demand'. > > Roger > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Behalf Of Ross Ferris > > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:06 PM > > To: U2 Users Discussion List > > Subject: RE: The future of U2 > > > > > > I'd also think that rather than "any" database, the target would > > be DB2 :-) > > > > Ross Ferris > > Stamina Software > > Visage – an Evolution in Software Development > > > > > > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > > -- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
I believe the wording was DB2 and then others based on 'demand'. Roger > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Ross Ferris > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 11:06 PM > To: U2 Users Discussion List > Subject: RE: The future of U2 > > > I'd also think that rather than "any" database, the target would > be DB2 :-) > > Ross Ferris > Stamina Software > Visage – an Evolution in Software Development > > > http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
I'd also think that rather than "any" database, the target would be DB2 :-) Ross Ferris Stamina Software Visage – an Evolution in Software Development >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of djordan >Sent: Wednesday, 14 April 2004 10:20 AM >To: 'U2 Users Discussion List' >Subject: RE: The future of U2 > >I think the target was for next year. > >David Jordan > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >On Behalf Of Steve Mayo >Sent: Wednesday, 14 April 2004 2:46 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: The future of U2 > > > >Hi, > >Does anyone out there know whether IBM is considering database >independence (ala jBase) for the U2 databases? By this, I mean >unplugging the Unidata/Universe database and plugging in SQL Server or >some other database. The last I heard that it was being considered for a >future release, but have not heard anything recently. If so, any idea >when this might happen? > >TIA, > >Steve Mayo >Software Engineer >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > >-- >u2-users mailing list >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > >--- >Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 9/04/2004 -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
RE: The future of U2
I think the target was for next year. David Jordan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Mayo Sent: Wednesday, 14 April 2004 2:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: The future of U2 Hi, Does anyone out there know whether IBM is considering database independence (ala jBase) for the U2 databases? By this, I mean unplugging the Unidata/Universe database and plugging in SQL Server or some other database. The last I heard that it was being considered for a future release, but have not heard anything recently. If so, any idea when this might happen? TIA, Steve Mayo Software Engineer -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
