Text 5353, 194 rader
Skriven 2005-06-24 00:19:10 av Rich (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 5341 av Mike '/m' (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: oracle returning wrong data to mike, again
======================================================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0339_01C57852.58AE0C60
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Nice spin on own your earlier attempts to lay blame for you getting =
bad results from your oracle database. We can ignore that which index = if any
is the "primary" index is not relevant despite you trying to = assert a
connection. What you fail to mention about that thread is that = beside your
assertion and your repeated attempts to spread blame = elsewhere you never
identified what was wrong, what you changed to get = the correct results from
oracle, and some evidence to support your = disparaging statements. Do you
really want to discuss why your make = disparaging remarks but make a diversion
when asked to back up your = claims?
As for your new attempts to question why SQLPrimaryKeys may not be =
used, a simple answer is that it is often buggy, its level 2 not level = 1, and
other than UI to display a linked table's definition it doesn't = matter. See
=
http://support.borland.com/entry.jspa?externalID=3D1623&categoryID=3D333 = for
an example of it returning incorrect results for oracle. See =
http://community.borland.com/article/0,1410,25091,0.html for an example = of it
returning incorrect results for interbase. You probably should = avoid calling
SQLPrimaryKeys for mysql too. See = http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=3D3797.
Rich
"Mike '/m'" <mike@barkto.com> wrote in message =
news:v4dmb15fampi1025tim8ssifm43kqusg1f@4ax.com...
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 06:24:23 -0400, "Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote:
>"John Cuccia" <jcuccia@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:u1djb1dkjvvqk9j4clgajl86tuhtsott6j@4ax.com...
>> Well, I've read the thread between you and Geo and I am confused.
>>
>> Would you mind explaining again, please?
>
>He's worried that if he explains in plain terms that it might be news =
(I
>would think deliberately inaccurate security bulletins would be a =
news
>worthy item) and he might get quoted and then he might get in trouble =
for
>telling the truth when it's pretty obvious that MS isn't interested =
in the
>truth being known.
>
>I don't want Rich to ever get in trouble for talking to us, do you?
I'd never want anyone to get into trouble for what is posted here. =20
I am just not convinced that is Rich's reason for being so obstinate
here. He was similarly obstinate when I brought up the problem with =
MS
Access returning the wrong data via an ODBC connection. He even said
that the ODBC API doesn't identify the primary index, even though =
there
is an SQLPrimaryKeys ODBC call which does return the primary key. I
even posted a link to that ODBC call on Microsoft's site. Why doesn't
MS Access use it, instead of posting a "working as designed" KB =
article.
When I tried to get clarification on that thread, all I received was =
the
similar barrage of ad hominem insults that I have been receiving here =
on
the buffer overrun topic.
On the other hand, if Rich does not want to have to answer questions =
in
threads because he may fear being quoted, as you say, then maybe it
would be better for him to just stay out of the thread or not answer =
the
questions, instead of throwing insults. =20
/m
------=_NextPart_000_0339_01C57852.58AE0C60
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> Nice spin on own your =
earlier attempts=20
to lay blame for you getting bad results from your oracle = database. We
can=20
ignore that which index if any is the "primary" index is not relevant =
despite=20
you trying to assert a connection. What you fail to mention about =
that=20
thread is that beside your assertion and your repeated attempts to = spread
blame=20
elsewhere you never identified what was wrong, what you changed to get = the=20
correct results from oracle, and some evidence to support your = disparaging=20
statements. Do you really want to discuss why your make = disparaging=20
remarks but make a diversion when asked to back up your = claims?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> As for your new attempts =
to question=20
why SQLPrimaryKeys may not be used, a simple answer is that it is often =
buggy,=20
its level 2 not level 1, and other than UI to display a linked =
table's=20
definition it doesn't matter. See <A=20
href=3D"http://support.borland.com/entry.jspa?externalID=3D1623&categ=
oryID=3D333">http://support.borland.com/entry.jspa?externalID=3D1623&=
categoryID=3D333</A> for=20
an example of it returning incorrect results for oracle. See <A=20
href=3D"http://community.borland.com/article/0,1410,25091,0.html">http://=
community.borland.com/article/0,1410,25091,0.html</A> for=20
an example of it returning incorrect results for interbase. You =
probably=20
should avoid calling SQLPrimaryKeys for mysql too. See <A=20
href=3D"http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=3D3797">http://bugs.mysql.com/bu=
g.php?id=3D3797</A>.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Mike '/m'" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:mike@barkto.com">mike@barkto.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:v4dmb15fampi1025tim8ssifm43kqusg1f@4ax.com">news:v4dmb15famp=
i1025tim8ssifm43kqusg1f@4ax.com</A>...</DIV>On=20
Thu, 23 Jun 2005 06:24:23 -0400, "Geo" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> =
wrote:<BR><BR>>"John=20
Cuccia" <<A =
href=3D"mailto:jcuccia@bigfoot.com">jcuccia@bigfoot.com</A>>=20
wrote in=20
=
message<BR>>news:u1djb1dkjvvqk9j4clgajl86tuhtsott6j@4ax.com...<BR>>=
>=20
Well, I've read the thread between you and Geo and I am=20
confused.<BR>>><BR>>> Would you mind explaining again,=20
please?<BR>><BR>>He's worried that if he explains in plain terms =
that it=20
might be news (I<BR>>would think deliberately inaccurate security =
bulletins=20
would be a news<BR>>worthy item) and he might get quoted and then =
he might=20
get in trouble for<BR>>telling the truth when it's pretty obvious =
that MS=20
isn't interested in the<BR>>truth being known.<BR>><BR>>I =
don't want=20
Rich to ever get in trouble for talking to us, do you?<BR><BR>I'd =
never want=20
anyone to get into trouble for what is posted here. <BR><BR>I am =
just=20
not convinced that is Rich's reason for being so =
obstinate<BR>here. He=20
was similarly obstinate when I brought up the problem with =
MS<BR>Access=20
returning the wrong data via an ODBC connection. He even =
said<BR>that=20
the ODBC API doesn't identify the primary index, even though =
there<BR>is an=20
SQLPrimaryKeys ODBC call which does return the primary key. =
I<BR>even=20
posted a link to that ODBC call on Microsoft's site. Why =
doesn't<BR>MS=20
Access use it, instead of posting a "working as designed" KB=20
article.<BR><BR>When I tried to get clarification on that thread, all =
I=20
received was the<BR>similar barrage of ad hominem insults that I have =
been=20
receiving here on<BR>the buffer overrun topic.<BR><BR>On the other =
hand, if=20
Rich does not want to have to answer questions in<BR>threads because =
he may=20
fear being quoted, as you say, then maybe it<BR>would be better for =
him to=20
just stay out of the thread or not answer the<BR>questions, instead of =
throwing insults. <BR><BR> /m</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0339_01C57852.58AE0C60--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|