Explicit SQL casts? 
Author Message
 Explicit SQL casts?
Does Informix's SQL allow any explicit type casting available prior to
version 9.xx of IDS?

We're using IDS 7.31.UC4 on Intel (don't ask).



Tue, 28 Oct 2003 04:49:32 GMT
 Explicit SQL casts?

Quote:

> Does Informix's SQL allow any explicit type casting available prior to
> version 9.xx of IDS?

No.

Quote:
> We're using IDS 7.31.UC4 on Intel (don't ask).

Why?  Why can't we ask?  Why are you using Solaris for Intel?

--
Yours,

Guardian of DBD::Informix v1.00.PC1 -- http://www.perl.com/CPAN
     "I don't suffer from insanity; I enjoy every minute of it!"



Wed, 29 Oct 2003 05:04:09 GMT
 Explicit SQL casts?
Quote:


>> We're using IDS 7.31.UC4 on Intel (don't ask).

>Why?  Why can't we ask?  Why are you using Solaris for Intel?

Yeah - what's wrong with Intel? Sure the instruction set is ugly and it
needs 10x more registers, but they out-RISC'd the RISC chips at least 5
years ago, WITH far more powerful instructions. RISC may not be officially
dead, but it's on life-support. That's the contemporary thinking in the
chipset world according to a few magazine articles.


Fri, 31 Oct 2003 08:27:13 GMT
 Explicit SQL casts?
Okay -- you asked for it, buddy:

What happens when you let bean counters and other ignorant management types
make procurement decisions for IT-related products based solely on sticker
price and on which they should have consulted their technical experts?  You
get 1) INCREASED costs due to the kluge [spelled K-L-U-G-E, pronounced
"klooj", does not rhyme with "fudge" or "budge", nor is it spelled the same]
factor of  having to make the now-purchased junk work, and this requiring
purchase of other junk, not to mention wasting staff time dreaming up the
kluge solution; or even purchasing what should have been purchased in the
first damned place; and  2) convoluted, horribly complex solutions to
technical problems which prove to be even _more_ expensive and frustrating to
document, deploy, maintain and enhance.

Now, more specifically, how many major software products which are widely
available on  Solaris/Sparc are available on Solaris/Intel?  Answer: Way less
than you think because -- surprise! -- way, way fewer people are on this
platform, in spite of whatever Sun's marketing dept. says.  So if you think
that, say, a popular report server is available on Solaris/Intel, you're
wrong.  So now write it from scratch, subcontract the work out, or incorporate
another platform (hint: the initials of the vendor are MS)  into your solution
architecture.

Get the point?

But this appears to be the status quo.

And the forces of ignorance march on.

Newsgroup readers should be well acquainted with this platform/product
lack-of-support-due-to-small-user-base phenomenon since we (ostensibly) use
Informix.  How many data modeling tools fully support Informix SQL?  I know
damned well that Embarcadero ERStudio doesn't, and they don't plan to because
nobody uses Informix (WalMart is nobody?  Home Depot is nobody? GEICO is
nobody?) -- at least, with respect to market penetration.  I assume it's the
same with other modeling tools (ERWin, Power Designor, or whatever it's now
called).

Now IBM has further tinkled in the Informix soup by ensuring that now no one
will purchase Informix products.  Think of it:  Why would you buy anything
from a software corporation that has been in steep decline since the original
fiduciary malfeasance of its senior officers was discovered years ago, and was
accordingly punished by the financial markets (but the individuals responsible
were not appropriately chastised -- castration would be too lenient); and has
continued sinking under the onerous weight of a merry-go-round of
self-aggrandizing co. officials wheeling and dealing, acquiring and divesting,
all apparently for their own personal benefit, and to hell with employees,
product users, paying customers, even; in short, an abysmally managed company
which, in spite of some stellar technical products, and due to atrocious
marketing and lackluster product development, may not be in existence in mere
months (weeks?)?  For IT managers seeking to purchase a DBMS -- or continue
with one -- this is not a rhetorical question.

Really:  How many IDS licenses has Informix sold in the last quarter?  In the
last year?  All newsgroup readers who want to be Informix salesmen raise your
hand.  I thought so -- take your hands out of your pockets.

So I answered your damned question, now answer mine from the original post:
Does Informix's SQL allow any explicit type casting available prior to version
9.xx of IDS?

We're using IDS 7.31.UC4 on Intel (don't ask _ever_ _again_).

Quote:



> >> We're using IDS 7.31.UC4 on Intel (don't ask).

> >Why?  Why can't we ask?  Why are you using Solaris for Intel?

> Yeah - what's wrong with Intel? Sure the instruction set is ugly and it
> needs 10x more registers, but they out-RISC'd the RISC chips at least 5
> years ago, WITH far more powerful instructions. RISC may not be officially
> dead, but it's on life-support. That's the contemporary thinking in the
> chipset world according to a few magazine articles.



Sun, 02 Nov 2003 21:12:26 GMT
 Explicit SQL casts?

Quote:
> > We're using IDS 7.31.UC4 on Intel (don't ask).

> Why?  Why can't we ask?  Why are you using Solaris for Intel?

Its free?

brett

--

-----------------------------------------------------------------
            Brett's 18th law of UNIX administration...
Newton also tells us that for every action there an equal and
opposite reaction, ergo for every downhill there is an opposite
and probably meaner uphill... esp when you are tired....
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Brett Geer - UNIX Admin/Analyst/Programmer - Intratex Holdings.
Tel. +27 31 717 4000 Direct. +27 31 717 4146
Fax. +27 31 717 4001
WWW. http://192.96.48.13/ibm/trivia/index.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
              The voices are back but sunburnt.
-----------------------------------------------------------------



Mon, 03 Nov 2003 14:08:56 GMT
 
 [ 5 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. explicit cast error

2. check validity of cast before performing cast?

3. CREATE CAST requires immutable cast function?

4. CREATE CAST requires immutable cast function?

5. Oracle SQL to MS SQL.How to CAST Binary to numerical

6. CAST in Local SQL? SQL Help needed

7. Disadvantages of the implementation of explicit subtypes on MS SQL 7 and Oracle8i/9i

8. Explicit Transaction Overhead in SQL Server 2000

9. Starting explicit transaction on SQL Server with OLE DB.

10. XML EXPLICIT in T-SQL

11. Generating Schema compliant XML from SQL Server Database using SQLXML and XML Explicit -- [Performance/Maintenance issues]

12. Documentation comparing SQL's FOR XML EXPLICIT and SQLXML 2.0 XSD schema relationships


 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software