RE: SQL vs. traditional I/O? -- MIDRANGE-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Subject: RE: SQL vs. traditional I/O?
From: PaulMmn <PaulMmn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 23:38:07 -0400
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

Joe wrote (in part):

Remember, a hammer hits nails just dandy, but that don't mean it's the
right tool to turn screws.

"If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail."


--Paul E Musselman
PaulMmn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"I don't make 'em up; I just remember 'em!"

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: SQL vs. traditional I/O? , Mark S. Waterbury

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.