I can't say if MV is slow or inefficient as far as database handling compared to various relational DBMS environments. Since the tests themselves (TPC, etc) are biased because they themselves are defined based on relational constructs, I suspect we'll never get real numbers that we can all agree on.
Aside from that you're way off. Stating that UV people "use PICK" and that UV is not supported by SAP or Peoplesoft tells me you aren't very familiar with this technology. Saying MV is slow and then advocating a translation to Java tells me you aren't too familiar with Java either. Saying Pick doesn't support "advanced level computing" is simply wrong, and so are a couple of your other claims. But I think we understand and can agree with your point that MV isn't "mainstream". Pick-based DBMS products are very capable with regard to communications. We can connect an MV app to anything. Connectivity methods aren't always mainstream but the claims of "little/NO support" and "not compatible" are incorrect. Non-MV products incorporate tools that we can use just as easily. Remember that programming and connectivity are not natively done within most other DBMS environments, they use outside tools to connect into a DBMS too. So in a sense, because we have tools inside and outside of our environments, we have a bit more to work with than they do - that is, BASIC can be considered a built-on RAD language compared to the inadequacies of stored procedures. It's counter-productive to get into one-upmanship against relational products and other staples of the IT world, so I'll just close by saying all of these products are as good as the skills of the people using them. Here at Nebula R&D we'll be happy to help you connect your app to anything you want, including SAP, Peoplesoft, DB2, or whatever else you or your trading partners use. Tony Joe Eugene wrote: >PICK is LEGACY Technology and does NOT Support alot of >advanced level computing we have today. > >1. UV has Little/NO support for Emerging >Technologies(XML/XQuery/XSLT/WML etc) 2. UV is Not supported >in Most Integration Enterprise Software (SAP/PeopleSoft) 3. UV >is Not efficient compared to highly evolved >databases(DB2/Oracle) 4. UV Folks seem to use PICK, which is >Not Compatible with many of > of the Current Advanced Technologies and Techniques. >5. UV is very SLOW, TOO Procedural and Not the right tool for > an OLTP Environment. > >It would be nice if IBM provided a Package to convert all UV >Stuff to IBM DB2 and perhaps provide some kinda code converter >to convert all pick stuff to DB2 Stored Procs or Java Native >Compiled Procedures. I belive this would be ideal and would >help corportations intergrate systems easily. -- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
