Re: Modernization and multi-member files

Dave Odom wrote:

Joe, Joe, Joe,

Dave, dave, dave/

It is a given in the rest of the relational world, especially the rest of the DB2s, that any access other than via SQL is a back door and considered a security problem.

Please find a single reference that states that DB2's ISAM access is a security risk. Especially since every native I/O operations is subject to the same checks and security considerations that SQL access is subject to.

You might not want to admit it but it is true.

Actually, you don't want to admit that you can't back up your statement with a single credible reference.

Dr. Codd never said that ISAM access was bad. Chris Date never said so. And there isn't a single authoritative reference that singles out DB2's ISAM access as a security risk.

The closest you can get is the non-subversion rule, and since IBM's ISAM access requires it to follow all integrity restraints imposed by DDL definitions, it meets that rule.

You actually don't even understand the rules you are attempting to apply.

As to my credibility on this forum... not concerned. Either others are willing to consider they might be wrong and and I might be right or they are not. Argiments like this usually come from religious zealots who's experience is limited mostly to the i5 and have little or no experience in the other DB2 worlds.

Since you have nothing to back up your words, and instead cling to your beliefs despite evidence to the contrary, one might consider that it is *your* statements that fit the definition of zealotry. This is buttressed by your declaration that you don't care about your credibility, but instead insist that you are right despite being the only one with your peculiar beliefs.

When the entire world disagrees with you and you insist that you are right, that is the definition of zealotry.

Joe