> Generally speaking, nothing should be referred to as a > database unless it is ACID compliant.
That seems like an awfully stringent definition. How do you justify that restriction on a common term of art which generally is interpreted pretty broadly? There are lots of databases that aren't adequate for handling transactions, but that doesn't mean they're not databases. They might not be GOOD databases, but that's another thing entirely. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ voice: (202) 797-5496 fax: (202) 797-5444 ______________________________________________________________________ Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
