Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for December 5, 2013
Deadline scheduling: coming soon?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 27, 2013
ACPI for ARM?
LWN.net Weekly Edition for November 21, 2013
They keep talking about SQL 99, but it was canceled out by ISO SQL:2003. Each revision of ISO SQL cancels the previous ones, so that any claims of ISO SQL:(19(89|9) are irrelevant.
Posted Nov 29, 2005 22:59 UTC (Tue) by AnswerGuy (guest, #1256)
Every DBMS lists its target compliance in terms of the most recent SQL standard to which they aspire. Also each new SQL standards release is
mostly built on the previous one.
So there is nothing irrelevant in hearing that they've added a number of
SQL-99 compliant features. It would be interesting if you saw and listed
any of them which are specifically superceded by something in the 2003
version, or even if you linked to some useful summary of the salient differences such as:
ACM: SQL-2003 Has been Published
Firebird Future Development
Posted Nov 30, 2005 17:57 UTC (Wed) by fsgg (guest, #34223)
Hm, and wich rdbms you know of does comply fully to any of the aforementioned standards? :-)
Posted Aug 4, 2006 21:40 UTC (Fri) by leandro (guest, #1460)
wich rdbms you know of does comply fully to any of the aforementioned standards?
None, even if IBM DB2 and PostgreSQL come close, as Mimer do. But they are not RDBMSs; nowadays there aren't many, Alphora Dataphor and Rel come to mind, besides the G-Exec2 project.
But my point was that people show know what they talk about.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds