Re: Ontape verification method?

Now I'm really surprised. Has Clem forgotten that the IIUG now has the advocacy program with the express intention of getting feature requests from our members formatted into something concrete and then presented to INFORMIX. There is an engines advocacy group and details of this group can ne found on the IIUG web-site. I suggest this should be a priority feature request for that group. I would suggest that we should go further in the definition of this. The users of INFORMIX want a facility to produce verifiable archives of the data. In addition they want a facility which allows for two copies of each archive and logs tape to be produced. One to be kept on-site, and one as an off-site back-up. regards Malcolm At 02:21 20/11/97 -0800, Clem Akins wrote: }>> Informix: Lack of verification capability in `ontape` is an *unacceptible* }>> deficiency in the product. } }> Having your customers make unverifiable backups is reckless and }>irresponsible. Informix: fix your stuff! Our data depends on it! } }Don't imagine that posting requests like this to c.d.i. informs "Informix" }as a corporation of your desires. You should call your local sales }representative, and/or your tech support number, and make your request }in a way that can be recorded. If you want a feature then call tech }support and ask to enter a "feature request." } }AFAIK, Informix is going to provide the archive verification ability in }the ontape and onbar programs in the next minor release. This is due }out in the Spring, though you should in no way construe that as an }official promise. } }See? Informix does listen to customer desires. :) }___________________________________________________________ }Clem Akins (aka clem@informix.com) <- NEW ACCOUNT! }Informix Software, Inc (Standard disclaimers apply) }International Technical Support }Last seen: Tangmere Field, site of the Battle of Britain } } Malcolm Weallans Online Database Consultancy (+44)1628 672154 Fax (+44)1628 637463