Conference ulysse::rdb_vms_competition

345.0. "starbase vs rdb in the UK" by BAHTAT::BLYTHE (Jon Blythe, DTN 7-845-2290) Fri May 05 1989 17:28

    Starbase Evaluation
    
    From Jon Blythe, Leeds Office (LZO - 7-845-2290)
    
    I'm new to these VAX notes as I've just joined on 17 April. I was
    at the IM Competency Circle on 17 April in Roundabout land (sorry,
    Basingstoke)
    
    I used to work 3 years for Cognos, and in my last job as a contractor,
    I evaluated Starbase versus RdB .
    
    Firstly, a little about the site, which I found to be typical of
    a medium size PowerHouse user.
    
    Vax 750 *, MV2 *, MV3600, MV2000* (*=ran PowerHouse)
    5 Development staff - not particulary experienced, not so hot on
    the design and analysis bits.
    Running a Basic SOP system on the 750, Sales Analysis on the MV2,
    and a Ledger System on the MV2000. They also run PCSA for micro
    systems and transfer data to an IBM steam computer by SNA Gateway.
    
    The PowerHouse systems were used to analyse sales data in a myriad
    of ways, which were constantly changing. Paper reports were out,
    so it was all screen based (though there were some old paper reports
    that wre being left to wither) - ie the end users were not given
    development capability as most of them werent up to it - although
    some of them has PC based applications, Lotus 123 and the like -
    but they did not have direct access to the database.
    
    IE this site is an ideal candidate for RdB - looking at the same
    data in many different ways.
    
    Starbase was looked at first - Mike Thomas (the Cognos StarBase
    guru - he'd been in Canada for 3 months helping them sort it out
    - previously he had some experience with RdB but not much) came
    to install it, this was done in 40 minutes, cleanly, and it worke
    first time. The manulas were not ready (as it was a Beta test of
    the database) - these were OK, up to the normal standard of
    documantation (Ive still got a copy). I converted a simple Rep
    Reporting system containing 6 data files and 8 screens in a day,
    with few problems.
    The route I took was :
    Create PDL listing (PowerHouse Dictionary Language - similar to
    RDO commands)
    Butcher this to GDL (?) their RDO style commands
    Load up these commands (can be done on line or in batch)
    Create Database
    
    I ran a small "benchmark" - taking data from RMS files and loading
    it into the database via QTP - the Batch processing part of PowerHouse
    - it took 7 minutes as opposed to 16 minutes reloading the RMS files.
    
    Fine. - the programmer does not have to know whether they were
    accessing a database / RMS files.
    
    Next, I was going to look at RdB. Firstly, it would not load, due
    to a sysmbol being left by StarBase installation / a previous attempt
    at putting RdB on the system in the past. This was eventually fixed,
    and I did the same system, and it took the same time. There was
    hardly any difference in the time it took to create the application
    - the code was exactly the same in the programs, the RDO code was
    very similar to the StarBase equivalent (round brackets instead
    of square - that sort of thing). The performance - the CPU time
    take, Page Faults, disk IO were more or less the same, with Starbase
    being 5% more frugal on disk I/O - but whats that ?
    
    The functionality was exactly the same. No attempt was made at tuning
    the dataases - anyway, with StarBase, you cant do much anyway -
    I regard that as a plus point for smaller sites - they dont want
    to employ (if they can get one) - a database tuning specialist -
    it is better to design the database, fill it, and leave it to get
    on with it. RdB acts in the same way - its performance seems to
    be adequate without masses of tuning on a small / medium site (as
    long as the initial design was right - StarBase as well).
    
    So in conclusion, THERE WAS NOTHING TECHNICALLY BETWEEN THE PRODUCTS
    IN THE WAY I WAS WANTING TO USE THEM. StarBase had 2PC, Distributed
    capability, black box architecture, triggers, optimistic locking.
    Big deal - RdB will have all this and more in v3.1 and evem more
    later on (although StarBase may leapfrog it before V4 comes out
    for a few months). Bit twiddlers may find Starbase to score 89/100
    and Rdb to score 85/100 BUT....
    
    RDB is ***CHEAPER***
    
    For the MV2, StarBase was circa 16,000 (incl a 15% introductory
    discount). Run time was 40% of this (I think - I'll check next week)
    
    Interactive RdB on the MV2 (as a PowerHouse user we did not need the 
    Pre-Compiler RdB) was circa 11,000 - RUN TIME FREE
    
    However - Interactive RdB + Vaxstation 3100 = 9,000 !!!!!!
    Benefits :-
    1 person administrating the database at 1 time
    Ability to use the forthcoming DEC windows admit tools
    You get a workstation as well - this is a cheap way to buy RdB -
    RdB IS NOT EXPENSIVE
    
    SO AGAINST STARBASE :-
    
    RBD (V3.1 and above) is	CHEAPER
    				HAS THE SAME IF NOT BETTER FUNCTIONALITY
    				WILL WORK ON VMS 5.X AND ABOVE
    				HAS THE SAME PERFORMANCE
    				HAS GOOD SUPPORT
    
    I know this is not a bit twiddling technical analysis, but there
    are plenty of those - eg the Butler report which we have access
    to.
    
    Please let me have your comments.
    
    
    Jon Blythe.
    
    

Jon,


>>>    So in conclusion, THERE WAS NOTHING TECHNICALLY BETWEEN THE PRODUCTS
>>>    IN THE WAY I WAS WANTING TO USE THEM. StarBase had 2PC, Distributed
>>>    capability, black box architecture, triggers, optimistic locking.
>>>    Big deal - RdB will have all this and more in v3.1 and evem more
>>>    later on (although StarBase may leapfrog it before V4 comes out
>>>    for a few months). Bit twiddlers may find Starbase to score 89/100
>>>    and Rdb to score 85/100 BUT....
    
RE: 2PC

   As I recall, YOU have to write the coordinator!  Since this is 90% of the
   work for 2PC...this seems to be NO bargain at all.

RE: Distributed capability

   Considering what they 'claim' about 2PC...just how 'Distributed' are they?

RE: Optimistic Locking, Black Box...

   Marketing Smoke and Mirrors...I'll let Hal crush that if he feels like it...
    

RE: Rdb/VMS will have...

   Please leave the futures stuff to us...we do like to keep control of
   planned features/versions/releases etc etc...
    
    
    
    
    Regards,
    
    Steve