Re: oracle sequence numbers
From: Pablo Sanchez <pablo_at_dev.null>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:40:14 -0600
Message-ID: <Xns9305D245F7D12pingottpingottbah_at_216.166.71.233>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 21:40:14 -0600
Message-ID: <Xns9305D245F7D12pingottpingottbah_at_216.166.71.233>
tonkuma_at_jp.ibm.com (Tokunaga T.) wrote in
news:8156d9ae.0301161913.4c8230b5_at_posting.google.com:
> Microsoft's "SQL Server Books Online: Transact-SQL Reference" says
Exactly. I'm not sure what the point of your follow-on post was
though. I think I clearly showed that Sybase ASE and SQL Server 2000
both behave as I originally posted and the above documentation simply
documents how the systems perform. Soooooooooooo, I'm not sure what your
point was/is? Was it to show that SQL Server and Sybase ASE are not in line
>
> [ snipped ]
>
> timestamp is used typically as a mechanism for version-stamping table
> rows.
-- Pablo Sanchez, High-Performance Database Engineering http://www.hpdbe.comReceived on Fri Jan 17 2003 - 04:40:14 CET