Re: IBM Debunks Oracle's MultiVersion Read Consistency ?

On 8 May 2003, joel-garry_at_home.com wrote:

> Well, a minor point, but since you ask, SEQUENCE. You might want to
> have, say, order numbers in a growing sequence, and not allow the
> reuse or skipping of order numbers.

I don't understand this requirement, its just silly to try to enforce and what the requirement is saying is, "I want intelligence in the key!!!"

-- 
Galen deForest Boyer
Sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground.