Re: Another angle on this....

From: Jim Kennedy <kennedy-family_at_attbi.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 15:52:08 GMT
Message-ID: <II8d8.106169$Pz4.416729@rwcrnsc53>

See:
http://download-west.oracle.com/otndoc/oracle9i/901_doc/server.901/a88856/c0 1intro.htm#3932
http://download-west.oracle.com/otndoc/oracle9i/901_doc/server.901/a88856/c0 2servr.htm#21536
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/ask/f?p=4950:8:527304::NO::F4950_P8_DISPLAYID,F 4950_P8_CRITERIA:1502605216980,%7Btransactions%7D http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/ask/f?p=4950:8:527304::NO::F4950_P8_DISPLAYID,F 4950_P8_CRITERIA:652424147595,%7Btransactions%7D http://technet.oracle.com/doc/oracle8i_816/server.816/a76965/c23cnsis.htm#17 882
"Heinz Kiosk" <no.spam_at_ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:dG5d8.2873$hM6.289452_at_news6-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> > Let me give you the reverse complaint list. One for
> > which there is no work-around in SQL Server.
> >
> > 1. No multiversioning.
> >
> > Didn't need any others. That one is more than enough. When you figure
out
> > how to code around that in TransactSQL let Bill Gates know.
> Yeah, right, like I'd help *him*.
> >
> > Daniel Morgan
> >
>
> What do you mean by multi-versioning anyway Dan? The briefest of
> explanations or a URL will suffice. I stumbled briefly around oracle.com
> looking for it but I couldn't come up with anything conclusive. Various
> possibilities but no 100% hit with the title, "This is what Daniel was
> referring to, Tom"
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thu Feb 21 2002 - 09:52:08 CST