> Why not ask the alternate question of why the SQL Server can't handle the > backend?
Simple Reason... "Management Politics". > No one is saying UV is a truly 'enterprise' class DB. WE AGREE 100% NOW! I was just trying to say the above. Going MainStream and staying with BIG THREE is Better for the future of the Company's Needs. BIG THREE has A LOT OF INVESTMENT in R&D and they are constantly on TOP OF TECHNOLOGY!. E.G. Is ASP.NET similar to Java J2EE? YES... as a matter of fact ASP.NET Copied a lot of the CORE Techniques... but why is ASP.NET just a little more better than Java J2EE? CAUSE: MS Had more money to PUMP into R&D and were able to REFINE some of the Techniques...e.g. Core improvement in RUNTIME ENVIROMENT AND COMPILATION. I know you are one of the GURU's OF UV System, it nice to hear some agreement on this argument. Thanks, Joe Eugene > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of David T. Meeks > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 11:56 AM > To: U2 Users Discussion List > Subject: RE: Modern Universe - was: The lists are closing > > So, UV does everything on the BackEnd, but SQL Server does your data > warehousing. > And you question why UV can't support the DW? Why not ask the alternate > question > of why the SQL Server can't handle the backend? > > No one is saying UV is a truly 'enterprise' class DB. It's not marketed > as > such. It's > an extremely efficient, low-cost, high-performance, zero administration DB > primarily > geared at being the backend (as you have now) for application usage. It's > primarily used > as an embedded database shipped as part of a solution package. It is > seldom sold as a > stand-alone DB. > > Building actual "applications" that directly go at your Oracle/DB2's of > the > world is > a pain in the arse. Administering said DBs is also a high-cost, complex, > cumbersome > task as well. > > Highlighting that the couple of UV people on your staff not knowing XML is > somehow > a weakness in the product is ludicrous. My wife is an Oracle > expert/DBA/etc... she > can barely spell XML. Does this imply Oracle's XML support sucks? Of > course not. > > Again, you pick on UV, claiming you have to use DataStage to pull data out > of UV > into SQL Server. > > Why then: > a) Doesn't SQL Server sufficiently handle your back-end? > b) Can't SQL Server directly access the data? > c) Is DataStage, the tool being used to do this (and handles Web > Services, > XML, > XPath, XSLT, etc...), built on top of UniVerse? > > Finally, don't fall into the mistake that performing well would mean you > would be > in the top 3. > > Why? Simple... marketing wins over technology almost all the > time. Informix was > a great example. They had a wonderfully performant VLDB technology. They > did very well in OLTP benchmarks. Yet, they weren't a top 3 DB (being > #4/#5, > depending on the timeframe). > > The U2 products are great products. They are not 'cutting edge', but they > are not > way behind either. Their target market is very different from the > "BigThree", and > many would argue they are much better at the job they are intended for > than the > Big Three. They are NOT better at all things. But, for low-cost, > low-maintenance > embedded data base support with high-performance, high-user concurrency > support, > it's hard to beat it. > > Dave > > At 11:27 AM 3/29/2004 -0500, you wrote: > > >We have UV doing everything on the BackEnd, we also have MSSQL Server to > >Support Data Warehousing... Why 2 Databases Systems? > >Cause UV Cant support Data Warehousing? > >Doesn't this eventually introduce Disparate Systems? > > > > > U2, for example, has support for Java connectivity, XML, and I believe > > > they either have or are working on Web Services support > > > >Its funny you say the above, UV/PICK Guys in our Team didn't even > >understand > >the basics of XML.. leave alone XPath, XQuery etc. These Technologies > >are NATIVELY Supported in ORACLE/DB2 Etc. > > > >e.g. We pull XML Reports from our Vendors Real Time. I have to parse > >through the XML and give UV/PICK Guys a FLAT TEXT File... cause either > >UV Cannot handle the storage and Retrival of XML Data Using XPath/XQuery > >Techniques. > > > >Yes, we use DataStage to pull data out of UV Into MSSQL SERVER... For > >what? > >Why cant UV handle of the DB Job? > > > >As for Performance...UV Does NOT Perform Well in a OLTP Environment, > >SIMPLE: > >IF UV did Perform Well...Today's Fortune 500 would depend on UV and > >UV/PICK > >would have been in the TOP 3 OF DataBases. > > > >Joe Eugene > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >On > > > Behalf Of David T. Meeks > > > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 9:37 AM > > > To: U2 Users Discussion List > > > Subject: RE: Modern Universe - was: The lists are closing > > > > > > While one could make the argument that Pick has not embraced emerging > > > technologies as rapidly as the 'Big Three', it HAS done so. > > > > > > U2, for example, has support for Java connectivity, XML, and I believe > > > they > > > either have or are working on Web Services support (I know, for > >example, > > > that > > > the DSEngine in DataStage has support for Web Services). > > > > > > One could argue the need or purpose of supporting certain > >technologies, > > > and > > > the level of support currently within the products, but to say that > >there > > > is > > > "little/no" support is a bit uninformed. > > > > > > The U2 products ARE supported in certain "Integration" software. I > > > wouldn't > > > typically consider SAP/PeopleSoft "integration" software. They are > > > Enterprise > > > Software Suites, but not geared particularly at 'integration'. > > > > > > However, given that SAP and PeopleSoft OEM the DataStage product sets > > > for both of their "integration" products (SAP's BW, PeopleSoft's EPM, > > > JDEdwards stuff as well), and given DataStage works very well with > >both U2 > > > products, this point is actually wrong. People who have SAP or > >PeopleSoft > > > solutions CAN, very easily, integrate their U2 data to/from those > > > environments. > > > > > > As to 'efficiency', one can measure that in a variety of different > > > dimensions. > > > From a memory/disk space/footprint/administrative overhead > >dimensions, > > > the > > > U2 database products are VERY efficient. > > > > > > Finally, as to being "slow", again this depends on the measurement > > > criteria > > > being used. From the perspective of concurrent user access and the > > > performance > > > of application style DB usage (largely input/output, multiple > >concurrent > > > users, etc..), > > > the U2 products stand up very well to the mainstream guys. For > >support of > > > VLDB, > > > highly transactional query-based usage models, and the like, it does > >not. > > > > > > Trying to make the U2 products into what they are not is wrong. They > >are > > > not the > > > panacea for every database requirement. However, for certain > >problems, > > > especially > > > those for which it was designed (embedded database for application > > > development), > > > it is very efficient. > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > At 10:24 PM 3/28/2004 -0500, you wrote: > > > >PICK is LEGACY Technology and does NOT Support alot of advanced > > > >level computing we have today. I belive PICK is Similiar to Legacy > >DB2 > > > >that used ISAM type of DataBases Access. Even IBM has moved DB2 (Now > >UDB) > > > >to a completly relational architecture. > > > > > > > >I belive some of the below are good reasons to Migrate to > > > >MainStream (Top 3 - DB2/Oracle/MSSQL etc) Databases. > > > > > > > >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. > > > > > > > >Joe Eugene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >________________________________ > > > > > > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Phil Walker > > > >Sent: Sun 3/28/2004 7:59 PM > > > >To: U2 Users Discussion List > > > >Subject: RE: The lists are closing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >David, > > > > > > > >As the list is closing this is probably not off topic - so I will > > > comment. > > > > > > > >I believe PICK has been around since the mid to late 1960's, whereas > > > Oracle > > > >and the SQL relation model has been around only since the mid to late > > > 1970's > > > >early 1980's if you are talking about Oracle etc. > > > > > > > >I may be wrong. > > > > > > > >Phil Walker > > > >+64 21 336294 > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >infocusp limited > > > >\\ PO Box 77032, Auckland New Zealand \ www.infocusp.co.nz > > > >DISCLAIMER: This electronic message together with any attachments is > > > >confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, do not copy, > > > disclose > > > >or use the contents in any way. Please also advise us by return > >e-mail > > > that > > > >you have received the message and then please destroy. infocusp > >limited > > > is > > > >not responsible for any changes made to this message and / or any > > > >attachments after sending by infocusp limited. We use virus scanning > > > >software but exclude all liability for viruses or anything similar in > > > this > > > >email or any attachment > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >Behalf Of Logan, David (SST - Adelaide) > > > >Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 12:36 PM > > > >To: U2 Users Discussion List > > > >Subject: RE: The lists are closing > > > > > > > >Best of luck Jeff, however I will point out the obvious, what is your > > > >definition of modern? I would have thought the good old "relational > > > >databases" have been around since before pick anyway? 8-) > > > > > > > >Regards > > > > > > > >David Logan > > > >Database Administrator > > > >HP Managed Services > > > >139 Frome Street, > > > >Adelaide 5000 > > > >Australia > > > > > > > >+61 8 8408 4273 > > > >+61 417 268 665 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >On Behalf Of Jeff Ritchie > > > >Sent: Monday, 29 March 2004 8:03 AM > > > >To: U2 Users Discussion List > > > >Subject: RE: The lists are closing > > > > > > > > > > > >Thanks for the memories Cliff :) > > > > > > > >Sorry to hear the lists are closing, but what the heck time and tide, > > > >work committments etc. > > > > > > > >As some one who is shortly to be ex mv, and moving into the more > >modern > > > >technologies l will decline the offer to join, but wish the site all > >the > > > >best. > > > > > > > >Cheers, > > > >Jeff > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > > >From: Moderator [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >Sent: Saturday, 27 March 2004 7:14 PM > > > >To: U2 Users Discussion List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >Subject: The lists are closing > > > > > > > > > > > >Dear Friends: > > > > > > > >After 10+ years of either hosting or supporting the info-prime, > > > >info-unidata, info-vmark, info-informix, and u2-users etc lists, I > >have > > > >decided to shut down the list server. > > > > > > > >u2-users and u2-community will cease to exist as of 1 April 2004. IBM > >is > > > > > > > >officially supporting the efforts of the new U2UG.org group. (Yes. I > >am > > > >a member of the establishing Board of that group. So this is not a > > > >"coup" or Sour Grapes!) If you check out the forums that have been > >set > > > >up, I think you will will see that they cover everything anyone has > > > >asked for over the years in this group. > > > > > > > >I *really* want to encourage ALL of you to come over the the > > > >www.u2ug.org site and support this effort. This is *exactly* what > >many > > > >of you on this list have wanted over the years. If Not Now, When? > > > > > > > >Almost ten years on my Watch. How many years before that on Mike > > > >O'Rear's Watch? In the Net World, this has been a Hell of a good run. > >(I > > > > > > > >just couldn't resist tripping the Net Nanny filters one last time > ><very > > > >evil grin>) > > > > > > > >I'll see all of you on the other media, ok? > > > > > > > >-- > > > > > > > >Regards, > > > > > > > >Clif > > > > > > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > >W. Clifton Oliver, CCP > > > >CLIFTON OLIVER & ASSOCIATES > > > >Tel: +1 619 460 5678 Web: www.oliver.com > > > >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > >-- > > > >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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > > >u2-users mailing list > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >http://www.oliver.com/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > > > > > > > >======================================================================= = > > > David T. Meeks || "All my life I'm taken by > >surprise > > > Architect, Technology Office || I'm someone's waste of time > > > Ascential Software || Now I walk a balanced line > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] || and step into tomorrow" - IQ > > > > >======================================================================= = > > > -- > > > 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 > > ======================================================================== > David T. Meeks || "All my life I'm taken by surprise > Architect, Technology Office || I'm someone's waste of time > Ascential Software || Now I walk a balanced line > [EMAIL PROTECTED] || and step into tomorrow" - IQ > ======================================================================== > -- > 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
