Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???

Eric Pearson

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
(in response to Bob LaCerais)
Main pro: If you already have trained Oracle staff you can leverage their
skills.
Main cons: DB2 consistently rates a bit better for performance, scalablilty,
integrity....
and *WAY* better for Total Cost of Ownership (includes hardware used,
staffing, license fees, etc.)

regards,

eric pearson
NS ITO Database Support


-----Original Message-----
From: Bob LaCerais [mailto:[login to unmask email]
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 4:55 PM
To: [login to unmask email]
Subject: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???


We currently run DB2 for OS/390 along with DB2 UDB on our RISC boxes.
There is a major project being discussed - rumor has it that it'll be done
in Oracle. What are the pro's and con's of implementing a VLDB in Oracle
as opposed to DB2?








Bob LaCerais

Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
We currently run DB2 for OS/390 along with DB2 UDB on our RISC boxes.
There is a major project being discussed - rumor has it that it'll be done
in Oracle. What are the pro's and con's of implementing a VLDB in Oracle
as opposed to DB2?



Nick Cianci

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
(in response to Eric Pearson)
Assuming an OS/390 deployment is an option.

PARTITIONING ! ? - would be one.
I don't believe that Oracle has it (I could be wrong though). This
would help the maintainabillity of your tables, and give other advantages in
performance when tackled carefully.

Being a self-confessed DB2 bigot (I still like ye olde Oracle as well), I'd
also say performance, robustness, and availability!

Seriously though it'd depend on what kind of data you want to store, and
what the application is supposed to do. To my "PERCEPTION" DB2 is fast and
bullet-proof, Oracle is more functionality based. Although the ground has
become blurred in the last few years

Cheers,
Nick Cianci
DB2 DBA - CCRI Project
2nd Floor (West) 484 StKilda Rd MELBOURNE 3004
* (+613) 9865-8554
(+61) 0408-64 06 01
* [login to unmask email]
_______________________________________________________________

No trees were killed in the sending of this
message. However - a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
_______________________________________________________________

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob LaCerais [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 8:55 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
>
> We currently run DB2 for OS/390 along with DB2 UDB on our RISC boxes.
> There is a major project being discussed - rumor has it that it'll be done
> in Oracle. What are the pro's and con's of implementing a VLDB in Oracle
> as opposed to DB2?
>
>
>
>
>



Mohammed Nayeem

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
(in response to Nick Cianci)
DB2 is well organised.
DB2 possess system Catalogue information and I believe it does' nt exist in
oracle.

---------------------- Forwarded by Mohammed Nayeem/MoMedicaid/US on 01/08/2001
04:16 PM ---------------------------


"Cianci, Nick" <[login to unmask email]> on 01/08/2001 04:11:25 PM

Please respond to DB2 Data Base Discussion List <[login to unmask email]>

To: [login to unmask email]
cc: (bcc: Mohammed Nayeem/MoMedicaid/US)

Subject: Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???



Assuming an OS/390 deployment is an option.

PARTITIONING ! ? - would be one.
I don't believe that Oracle has it (I could be wrong though). This
would help the maintainabillity of your tables, and give other advantages in
performance when tackled carefully.

Being a self-confessed DB2 bigot (I still like ye olde Oracle as well), I'd
also say performance, robustness, and availability!

Seriously though it'd depend on what kind of data you want to store, and
what the application is supposed to do. To my "PERCEPTION" DB2 is fast and
bullet-proof, Oracle is more functionality based. Although the ground has
become blurred in the last few years

Cheers,
Nick Cianci
DB2 DBA - CCRI Project
2nd Floor (West) 484 StKilda Rd MELBOURNE 3004
* (+613) 9865-8554
(+61) 0408-64 06 01
* [login to unmask email]
_______________________________________________________________

No trees were killed in the sending of this
message. However - a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
_______________________________________________________________

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob LaCerais [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 8:55 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
>
> We currently run DB2 for OS/390 along with DB2 UDB on our RISC boxes.
> There is a major project being discussed - rumor has it that it'll be done
> in Oracle. What are the pro's and con's of implementing a VLDB in Oracle
> as opposed to DB2?
>
>
>
>
>








James Campbell

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large databa se???
(in response to Mohammed Nayeem)
Some random jottings:

How large is "very"? What processing load will be on the data? How does
this load compare to benchmarks (eg www.tpc.org).

I note that you refer to already using DB2, but didn't mention that you use
Oracle. If you don't, have the costs associated with supporting Oracle been
considered - training, maintaining yet another skill set, buying in
experience? RYC used to have a white paper on the costs, but I can't find
it today.

What is the driver that is pushing Oracle? Is it coming from an
individual/group who happens to be comfortable with Oracle, when the
organisation is not?

and on other replies to your question:

Partitioning - "newe" Oracle V8 has it. Due to Oracle's design, tables are
partitioned, not tablespaces.

Catalog information - one can read Oracle's catalog tables in much the same
fashion as DB2's. In addition, Oracle has a number of "dynamic views"
(often called "V$ views", because their names are prefixed by the characters
V$) which will give an application similar data to DB2's DISPLAY commands.

/* standard disclaimer */
James Campbell
DBA
Hansen Corporation, Doncaster
+61 3 9843 8442
[login to unmask email]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob LaCerais [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 8:55 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
>
> We currently run DB2 for OS/390 along with DB2 UDB on our RISC boxes.
> There is a major project being discussed - rumor has it that it'll be done
> in Oracle. What are the pro's and con's of implementing a VLDB in Oracle
> as opposed to DB2?
>


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************



Georg Peter

AW: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large databa se???
(in response to James Campbell)
James,

to "RYC used to have a white paper on the costs, but I can't find
it today......"

Try http://www.ylassoc.com/DB2%20Facts/DB2vsOracle.htm

HTH.

With kind regards - mit freundlichen Grüssen,
G e o r g H . P e t e r
DB2 Data Base Administrator c/o
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Datenzentrale Baden-Wuerttemberg
Software Development & Technology Center
Knowlegde Center Database Systems
Krailenshaldenstrasse 44, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
e:mail [login to unmask email]
Phone 0049-711-8108-271
PC-Fax 004971189696071
Internet (only in german language):http://www.dzbw.de
----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Rooting for best of breed is a great ideal, but it's not the sole
criterion for success...."




-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: James Campbell [mailto:[login to unmask email]
Gesendet am: Dienstag, 9. Januar 2001 03:39
An: [login to unmask email]
Betreff: Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large databa se???

Some random jottings:

How large is "very"? What processing load will be on the data? How does
this load compare to benchmarks (eg www.tpc.org).

I note that you refer to already using DB2, but didn't mention that you use
Oracle. If you don't, have the costs associated with supporting Oracle been
considered - training, maintaining yet another skill set, buying in
experience? RYC used to have a white paper on the costs, but I can't find
it today.

What is the driver that is pushing Oracle? Is it coming from an
individual/group who happens to be comfortable with Oracle, when the
organisation is not?

and on other replies to your question:

Partitioning - "newe" Oracle V8 has it. Due to Oracle's design, tables are
partitioned, not tablespaces.

Catalog information - one can read Oracle's catalog tables in much the same
fashion as DB2's. In addition, Oracle has a number of "dynamic views"
(often called "V$ views", because their names are prefixed by the characters
V$) which will give an application similar data to DB2's DISPLAY commands.

/* standard disclaimer */
James Campbell
DBA
Hansen Corporation, Doncaster
+61 3 9843 8442
[login to unmask email]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob LaCerais [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 8:55 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
>
> We currently run DB2 for OS/390 along with DB2 UDB on our RISC boxes.
> There is a major project being discussed - rumor has it that it'll be done
> in Oracle. What are the pro's and con's of implementing a VLDB in Oracle
> as opposed to DB2?
>


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************


visit the

.



Max Scarpa

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
(in response to Georg Peter)
If you want pain, a recover duration of months, some brand new features
(????) like packages and partitioning (ORACLE
8i), no access path (as far as I know until ORACLE 8i), only 1 BP for ALL
data and some other nice tuning features (???)

at less cost (hi hi hi ah ah ah uh uh uh..... yesss and I'm a Klingoon DB2
sysprog) buy Oracle.

Take into account that every 15000/20000 kilometers you must substitute
tires and spark plugs....

Good luck

Max Scarpa
Proud to be a 'Dino' DB2 sysprog



Ashish Agarwal

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
(in response to Max Scarpa)
Dear Bob,
Oracle will be costlier compared to db2 if buying Oracle's
latest version..Can u please write in more details about the kind of
transactions and size of databse involved for ur VLDB. Further, u have any
legacy/mainframe systems to upgrade or integrate with, in your new
project..?
Regards
Aashish

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob LaCerais [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 3:25 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
>
> We currently run DB2 for OS/390 along with DB2 UDB on our RISC boxes.
> There is a major project being discussed - rumor has it that it'll be done
> in Oracle. What are the pro's and con's of implementing a VLDB in Oracle
> as opposed to DB2?
>
>
>
>
>

Ashish Agarwal

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large
(in response to Ashish Agarwal)
Dear All,
system catalogue information exist in oracle
too.it has got a
different name though.. Data Dictionary and views, further
partitioning is
there in Oracle since its 8.0.3 version (released in 1997).
Further, it
doesnt take months to recover ..use RecoverY manager,
Multiplexing and
Standby Databases and ur database will be Up in no time.
Further, oracle i
believe is more open ended system unlike DB2 about which
runs best on IBM
platforms..
Am new to DB2 and have worked on oracle previously..and am
really not much
impressed..Though i must say its Equally robust, if not
more, compared to
Oracle.
Regards
Aashish

[login to unmask email]

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
(in response to Ashish Agarwal)
Much as I hate to defend Oracle but as from Oracle version 8.1.6 it has had
3 buffer pools (KEEP, DEFAULT and RECYCLE).

Jim.

-----Original Message-----
From: Max Scarpa [mailto:[login to unmask email]
Sent: 09 January 2001 08:28
To: [login to unmask email]
Subject: Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???


If you want pain, a recover duration of months, some brand new features
(????) like packages and partitioning (ORACLE
8i), no access path (as far as I know until ORACLE 8i), only 1 BP for ALL
data and some other nice tuning features (???)

at less cost (hi hi hi ah ah ah uh uh uh..... yesss and I'm a Klingoon DB2
sysprog) buy Oracle.

Take into account that every 15000/20000 kilometers you must substitute
tires and spark plugs....

Good luck

Max Scarpa
Proud to be a 'Dino' DB2 sysprog







***************************************************************
The contents of this Email and any files transmitted with it
are confidential and intended solely for the use of the
individual or entity to whom it is addressed. The views stated
herein do not necessarily represent the view of the company.
If you are not the intended recipient of this Email you may not
copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it
in any form whatsoever. If you have received this mail in
error please Email the sender.
***************************************************************



Max Scarpa

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
(in response to Jim.Leask@RS-COMPONENTS.COM)
Oh YES, 3 Bp, great !!! 1 for ts, 1 for ix, 1 for workfiles. AND from
version 8.1.6. !!! I suppose there's a 5 speed model too...

May be in version 9.69.69.69.69.69.69.69/HAL9000 you'll have a decent
access path, a decent I/O error detection

(without loosing tons of data, I saw this with my own eyes) , a
partitioning that work, may be parallellism (with 5 valves per

cylinder).

When I attended some ORACLE courses the teacher himself did not recommend
to migrate from ORACLE 7 to

ORACLE 8 (of course unofficially) until the most important bugs had been
corrected. And ORACLE 8i was just

announced as the most powerful RDMS in the solar system, while in my
previous shop ORACLE core was called

SYS1.GLUTEUS to differentiate ORACLE from MVS SYS1.NUCLEUS....

I started to work with ORACLE 8i (and I stopped there) and of course I
don't know the recent features. What I say it's from

my own experience and if a big data center (that was known as devoted to
UNIX/ORACLE because Oracle cost is

lesser hi hi hi ah ah ah uh uh uh) is evaluating to migrate to DB2 UDB it's
significant....

Regards
Max Scarpa



[login to unmask email]

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large databa se???
(in response to Max Scarpa)
Howdy Bob,

Having had some Oracle DBA background I'll make a few comments. As Jim
mentioned Oracle does have
some similar functions to DB2. In some cases it has some advanced functions
that DB2 does not currently
offer but will in Version 7.

A couple of things to think about: (I could write a thesis of reasons not
to consider Oracle but I will
keep it short). Oracle just recently offered something called Multithreaded
Server (MTS). What this function
allows is the ability to share Memory and Resources. Prior to this function
Oracle was single threading these
resources causing significantly higher overhead and holding concurrency to
a minimum.

Another thing is the cost of Oracle (TCO) - Power-unit costs are
significantly higher than DB2 $$$$$$$. Check
Richard Yevich's web site for information. Also, we all know how much money
and resources are saved with DB2's
COMPRESSION. In view of the fact that Oracle does NOT use compression we
have another BIG Dollar difference $$$$.

One more thing. If you check the DB2 Listerv Archives on October 24 you
will see where Richard Yevich made a statement
about Oracle vs. DB2 for OS390. I pasted it below.


Check out the DB2 vs Oracle TCO (total cost of ownership) paper on
www.ylassoc.com. Also, Oracle has less functionality than DB2, requires
more knowledge to tune and maintain (go to any book store and see the
volumes on Oracle tuning versus DB2 tuning). Oracle fails in every category
compared to DB2, including but not limited to: scaleability, concurrency,
SQL power, cost, 24 x 7, etc.

Regards,
Richard


GOOD LUCK,
Don Alden


-----Original Message-----
From: James Campbell [mailto:[login to unmask email]
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 7:39 PM
To: [login to unmask email]
Subject: Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large databa se???


Some random jottings:

How large is "very"? What processing load will be on the data? How does
this load compare to benchmarks (eg www.tpc.org).

I note that you refer to already using DB2, but didn't mention that you use
Oracle. If you don't, have the costs associated with supporting Oracle been
considered - training, maintaining yet another skill set, buying in
experience? RYC used to have a white paper on the costs, but I can't find
it today.

What is the driver that is pushing Oracle? Is it coming from an
individual/group who happens to be comfortable with Oracle, when the
organisation is not?

and on other replies to your question:

Partitioning - "newe" Oracle V8 has it. Due to Oracle's design, tables are
partitioned, not tablespaces.

Catalog information - one can read Oracle's catalog tables in much the same
fashion as DB2's. In addition, Oracle has a number of "dynamic views"
(often called "V$ views", because their names are prefixed by the characters
V$) which will give an application similar data to DB2's DISPLAY commands.

/* standard disclaimer */
James Campbell
DBA
Hansen Corporation, Doncaster
+61 3 9843 8442
[login to unmask email]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob LaCerais [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 8:55 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
>
> We currently run DB2 for OS/390 along with DB2 UDB on our RISC boxes.
> There is a major project being discussed - rumor has it that it'll be done
> in Oracle. What are the pro's and con's of implementing a VLDB in Oracle
> as opposed to DB2?
>


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************








Craig Mullins

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
(in response to Don.Alden@I-STRUCTURE.COM)
Bob:

I see you have already gotten a bunch of answers to your question from us
"DB2 bigots" on the DB2 list. Let me discuss a couple of issues I have not
yet seen discussed here. First of all, I hope you posted this question to a
least one Oracle newsgroup or mailing list, too. Although I agree that DB2
is probably your best choice (given the small amount of information given),
I also think it is good to hear both sides of the issue.

Secondly, since you are already a DB2 shop, I would argue against any other
DBMS (not just Oracle) solely on the basis of the additional complexity it
would introduce in terms of implementation, management, and on-going
support. Of course, if you also have a significant Oracle presence already
(in addition to the DB2), then this is less of an issue. If Oracle would be
new to the organization, try to determine not just the cost of the Oracle
license(s) you must purchase, but also the cost of additional skilled Oracle
technicians (Oracle DBA, Oracle developers, etc.) and the cost of management
tools for the new DBMS. If common sense ruled (and we all know it does not)
you would have to prove that a new DBMS offered significant functionality or
cost savings in order to bring it in. Perhaps if you do some due diligence
and try to come up with a cost figure for adding Oracle that factors in all
of the above, you might be able to scare management (or whoever started the
"rumor" you allude to) into making the right decision - - DB2.

Cheers,
Craig S. Mullins
Director, DB2 Technology Planning
BMC Software
http://www.bmc.com/products/s390data/index.html
[login to unmask email]
http://www.craigsmullins.com
[login to unmask email]


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob LaCerais [SMTP:[login to unmask email]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 8:55 AM
> To: [login to unmask email]
> Subject: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
>
> We currently run DB2 for OS/390 along with DB2 UDB on our RISC boxes.
> There is a major project being discussed - rumor has it that it'll be done
> in Oracle. What are the pro's and con's of implementing a VLDB in Oracle
> as opposed to DB2?
>



Max Scarpa

Re: Should we use DB2 or Oracle for our very large database???
(in response to Craig Mullins)
Hi Craig, Well said.

I left a company 2 years ago and, after 3+ years (and after some millions
of $$$$) they do not have

completed the migration from S390 to UNIX/ORACLE with the same performances
and reliability.

And the cost of toolz to manage/admin 100+ oracle db in a distributed
environment is becoming unacceptable.

Regards

Max Scarpa