DB2 9 bietet viele Verbesserungen gegenüber den Vorversionen und auch gegenüber konkurrierenden DBMS, vor allem in Sachen Performance und TCO. Diese Neuerungen werden ausführlich in einem Bloor Research "
White Paper" von Philip Howard beschrieben.
Immer wieder dieser PH. Dass er nicht nur Gutes über DB2 9 schreibt, sondern auch schon mal über Oracle Elaborate (warum bloss) zeigt sein Artikel "
Oracle rebuilds Warehouse".
Doch zurück zu DB2 9 mit einigen Kernaussagen aus dem White Paper:
zu XML
"It is because of its XML support that IBM was considering calling this release of its database DB3. This is because DB2 9 is no longer just relational. Instead, it offers a hybrid relational/XML environment."
zu XML und Oracle
"However, some suppliers, having introduced an XML datatype, have gone on to suggest that this therefore means that they have native support for XML storage. This is not the case—XML data is still either shredded or stored as a LOB—support for a datatype means that the database can natively understand that type of data but it does not mean that it is stored natively, so performance issues do not go away."
Wie wahr!
zu "Compression"
"Further, we know of no other relational database vendor (excepting the aforementioned column-based products) that can offer this level of compression."
Weder Oracle DB, MS SQL Server oder MySQL sind "column-based products". Vorlage für die
DB2 9 Kompression namens
Venom war die hardware-basierende
Kompressionstechnik für die Mainframe-Version von DB2.
"In other words, more often than not you should get a performance benefit as well as a reduced storage requirement."
"To conclude this section, even if we assume the lowest possible factor for reducing storage requirements, database size should be reduced by a third while, at worst, performance should stay approximately the same."
zu SAP
"Finally, it is worth bearing in mind that IBM has never been the leading database vendor underpinning SAP solutions. However, there are signs that that could change. Since DB2 version 8.2.2 came out with SAP integration, IBM has won a number of competitive SAP deals, some of which have migrated away from other database products."
zu "Range Partitioning"
"Nevertheless, the introduction of range partitioning is late. Some other vendors have been able to offer it for a decade."
"The bottom line is that, in competitive terms, range partitioning, in conjunction with the other features discussed, may provide a performance advantage (when compared to products that do not support unlimited range partitioning) and will offer an administrative advantage."
Neben "Range Partitioning" bietet DB2 noch "Database Partitioning" und "Multidimensional Clustering". Diese Breite von Möglichkeiten zur performance-verbessernden Aufteilung von Datenbankobjekten haben Oracle und Microsoft nicht zu bieten.
weitere Neuerungen
"These range from new on-line facilities such as dynamic bufferpool operations; online index creation and maintenance and online loading; to new automated features including backups and statistics collection, which will reduce administrative workload; and the removal of size limitations to Tablespaces."
Tablespaces bis zu 16 Terabyte, wer bietet mehr? Eine partitionierte Tabelle kann bis zu 16TB * 32K * 1000 (mit 32K "Ranges" und 1000 Datenbank-Partitionen) wachsen.
"In particular, there is now support for online table reorganisations. Previously, using the ALTER TABLE command (used, for example, to drop or change a column) meant that you had to drop the table completely and re-create it, which was not just time consuming and complex but you also had to quiesce the database. This feature will be a boon to developers though it is not before time (competitive products have been able to do this for some years)."
Das war auch langsam fällig.
Zusammenfassung
"To conclude: this release of DB2 introduces new capabilities that significantly exceed those of its competitors in a number of areas. In particular, its pureXML is a major advantage and in any company where XML is an important consideration (and this increasingly applies to all organisations), IBM should be at the head of the list when considering potential suppliers."
Gut gebrüllt, Löwe.
Es ist tatsächlich nicht so, dass die IT-Presse nicht lernfähig wäre. Einige Monate nach dem katastrophalen Ausrutscher des CW-Ressortleiters ue, hat die CW indirekt die Aussagen ihrer "Kenner der Datenbankszene" revidiert. Die CW-Muttergesellschaft
Aufgenommen: Oct 23, 11:32
... auf der kleinsten Platte. Selbst für große Datenbanken. Aber nur, wenn das DBMS über eine richtig starke Komprimierungsfunktion verfügt. Das ist wahr für DB2 9. Das ist nicht wahr für DBMS wie Oracle oder den SQL Server. Nun konnte ich bis
Aufgenommen: Dec 16, 22:15