Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!ll-xn!nike!lll-crg!lll-lcc!ptsfa!ssl
From: ssl@ptsfa.UUCP (Sam Lok)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: Various versions of Informix
Message-ID: <1851@ptsfa.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 14-Nov-86 14:19:42 EST
Article-I.D.: ptsfa.1851
Posted: Fri Nov 14 14:19:42 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Nov-86 04:44:29 EST
References: <6330@ut-sally.UUCP>
Reply-To: ssl@ptsfa.UUCP (Sam Lok)
Distribution: net
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Lines: 21
Keywords: Informix

In article <6330@ut-sally.UUCP> riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) writes:
>Does anyone out there have any experience with various versions of Informix?
>My organization has several medium-to-large databases running under plain old
>vanilla Informix which are soon to become a whole lot bigger.  Because of a
>desire for improved performance and a need to revamp the databases for other
>reasons anyway, we are considering starting over with Informix SQL or
>Informix ESQL.  Are the much-touted advantages of the latter two sufficient
>to justify the hassles of changing horses in mid-stream?  (We run System V
>on a 3B15, a 3B2 and various 3B1s, if it matters.)

SQL is great!  But Informix/ESQL is not so.  There are just too many
restriction put on by the ESQL precompiler.  Although last time I heard
Informix, Inc. now do supply the ALL library with ESQL upon asking!
If you don't do much C programming interface, SQL is definitely the
way to go!

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Sam Lok		San Francisco		{ihnp4,pyramid,qantel}!ptsfa!ssl
				|| To err is human, to really foul things
Disclaimer!?  WHAT disclaimer?	|| up requires super-user privilege!