Hmm... I've never used this before. I'll try it.
Thanks for your help and your quick reply!
--
Matthew Nuzum
www.bearfruit.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Fortunately we have the set functions, specifically UNION ALL in this
> case.
>
> Maybe something like (minus the number of files/empty part):
>
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Matthew Nuzum wrote:
> Well, this is somewhat of a follow up to my previous post regarding self
> joins. Now what I'm hoping to do is "virtually" combine the results
> from two different record sets into one apparent record set.
Fortunately we have the set functions, specif
