OT: Unix or UNIX or unix

Derek Broughton derek at pointerstop.ca
Tue Jun 16 12:55:07 UTC 2009

Steve Flynn wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Derek Broughton<derek at pointerstop.ca>
> wrote:
>> Smoot Carl-Mitchell wrote:
>> That's involved, but I assure you that's not the primary reason.  It's
>> because IMS is still a darned fast database system, and you _can't_ make
>> an RDBMS perform like that.  Why would you think that IMS has sat still
>> for those 40 years, while IBM has been developing DB2, Oracle has been
>> developing whatever it is they do, and even the F/LOSS community has
>> produced Postgres (I shan't deign to mention MySQL - oops, I did)?
> Speaking as an ex-IBM employee working on IMS and CICS (and currently
> as an contractor working on AIX and Oracle 10.2 RAC) I read this with
> a knowing smile! :)
> There is indeed a reason why the big Iron still keeps on chugging
> away... it's because it keeps on chugging away, six nines. Of course,
> that six carries a six in the yearly fees but if you want uptime *and*
> speed there's only one place you look... and it's not an RDBMS
> Personally, I care not a rats ass - I work for whoever wants me but if
> *I* were buying a very high availability and fast database it would be
> blue..

Me too, and my work these days is Oracle & Postgres - and even in my Big 
Blue days it was DB2 far more than IMS - but I recognize the inherent 
limitations (and strengths) of the RDBMS.

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list