"DA Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:1106778885.862393_at_yasure...
> DH wrote:
> > "Mark A" <nobody_at_nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:YYidndF07OuUQWvcRVn-2A_at_comcast.com...
> >>"Jim" <no-spam_at_no-spam.org> wrote in message
> >>news:d7mdv0552m04gccmphbgcl1jqheip2g2jd_at_4ax.com...
> >>>Thank you. Your point is...?
> >>I did not have any point. The post provided information from another
> >>website concerning comparative database performance.
> >>
> >>I already apologized for posting it, since I did not know that this
> >>information was posted and discussed here previously.
> >
> > I don't see any reason why you apologize. The previous post on this
topic
> > was titled "New IBM Nonsense".
>
> That is incorrect. The initial post was made to comp.databases.oracle
> and was a pro-DB2 slam on Oracle. Go to google groups and look it up.
> What you found here is a follow up response to the original post.
Googling with various seemingly appropriate search terms turns up nothing
relevant. Do you remember the precise title of a post previous to "New IBM
Nonsense?" Or the author's name? And what's "New IBM Nonsense" as a title
for this subject if not a slam on DB2?
Received on Fri Jan 28 2005 - 09:43:51 CST
