Re: 8 hours tests ends with inconsistent DB.

[Dave Horsfall <daveh@ci.com.au>]

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004, Tony Earnshaw wrote:

> As I said, let it run its course. I wonder what the acceptable
> alternative would be. Sun, Netscape, IBM? Windows AD? For me, OL 2.2.12
> (2.2.13 in the works) is an unbelievably stable, relatively easily
> configured and versatile engine. And I'd like to see whatever assertions
> as to the opposite proved wrong, *as well as* a final choice of
> appropriate hardware, OS and configuration details.

You know, if an outsider were to look at these exchanges, s/he could
conclude that Mr Warren had deliberately set out to discredit OL.  He's
applied a humungous test against what would appear to be an
underconfigured system, and has paid little heed to the expert advice
offered herein.

I'm not saying that that's his intention, of course, but it sure as hell
looks like it...

Please tell us that this is not the case, Mr Warren (if that's your real
name; in general I don't trust freemail accounts).

-- 
Dave Horsfall  DTM  VK2KFU  daveh@ci.com.au  Ph: +61 2 9906-7866  Fx: 9906-1556
Corinthian Engineering, Level 1, 401 Pacific Hwy, Artarmon, NSW 2064, Australia