Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.databases.oracle    |    Overblown overpriced overengineered SHIT    |    2,288 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 374 of 2,288    |
|    Jim Kennedy to Larry Edelstein    |
|    Re: Company thought DB2 will be better t    |
|    13 Sep 03 16:00:49    |
      XPost: comp.databases.informix, comp.databases, comp.databases.ibm-db2       From: kennedy-down_with_spammers@no_spam.comcast.net              DB2 doesn't do dynamic SQL; it turns dynamic SQL into static SQL and runs       that. If you issue dynamic SQL (and do not commit) then anyone who is       trying to bind after you is hung until you commit. Why? Because the       dynamic sql is bound and a plan is generated, a row is added to the plan       table (thus blocking others from adding to the plan table, until you       commit). Since the concurrency model in db2 is not very concurrent people       issueing dynamic sql lock out those trying to bind their plans in. It       really pisses the developers on the system off. I was at ATT (American       Transtech) years ago with DB2 running on a mainframe and this was a major       problem. So we had to take the application and remove any transactions and       just do everything in an autocommit type of mode.(issue select...;       commit;...etc.)              Binding is a nice and powerfule thing, but the way IBM has implimented it it       really makes DB2 an autocommit only type of database. Ugly real ugly.       Jim              "Larry Edelstein" |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca