It is a wonder to me that there is any upside to your posting here at all. It seems like you thrive on the rejection that so often comes your way after another of your anti - i posts.
"Dave Odom" <Dave.Odom@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 07/16/08 6:17 PM >>>
The only "world" that doesn't agree with me is your world and perhaps some of the legacy i world. The rest of the relational world know and agree it is a universal truth that all true RDBMs have only one access method; the defacto standard is SQL. That's the way the world really works.
Ever work in any other DB2 world on the mainframe, speak at regular DB2 conferences as I have? What do they say of your "view" of the i5 DB2 vs their DB2's. I'd like you to espouse your views at IDUG and see what happens.
You see, credibility to you is if it is something you'll agree with and since we can't agree that you have but to look at the other platforms and their writings and their meetings, etc., etc, then nothing I say, even if I went back to my early '80s books and documents would be something you'd agree with and therefore be proof. I know this because you've come up with ways to use Ted and Chris's proofs and rules to suite the i5 implementation of DB2.
So, what's my reward for going back to long accepted works to find you a "proof" that you'd accept? To get your approval? Would it change the minds of the majority on this forum on how they implement on the i5? I doubt it, so what purpose, other than acidemic exercise would it serve. Besides, I KNOW you'd find a way to debunk it as you do anything or anyone on here that doesn't agree with you. I see no up side in this for me.