Hello,

is there any rough estimate of when Postgres ANSI SQL compliance
is planned to be implemented? Will it be in 6.6, 6.7, or later?
Any info would be appreciated.

Nejc

-- 
''Share and Enjoy.''


Sun, 29 Aug 1999 14:43:16 +0200
Jernej Zajc <jernej@4u.net>
ANSI SQL compliance
Jernej Zajc <jernej@4u.net> writes:
> is there any rough estimate of when Postgres ANSI SQL compliance
> is planned to be implemented? Will it be in 6.6, 6.7, or later?

What do you define as "ANSI compliance"?

There isn't any master plan that says "we will have every single
SQL92 feature implemented by release N".  (In fact, as far as I
can tell there's no master plan at all ;-).)  If there are particular
features you're in need of, mentioning what they are might help
push up their priorities in the minds of the developers.

			regards, tom lane

Sun, 29 Aug 1999 12:48:09 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] ANSI SQL compliance 
Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Jernej Zajc <jernej@4u.net> writes:
> > is there any rough estimate of when Postgres ANSI SQL compliance
> > is planned to be implemented? Will it be in 6.6, 6.7, or later?
> 
> What do you define as "ANSI compliance"?

Well you asked the wrong person - people at ANSI should know
better :-)
I meant adherence to the ANSI SQL standard.

> There isn't any master plan that says "we will have every single
> SQL92 feature implemented by release N".  (In fact, as far as I
> can tell there's no master plan at all ;-).)  If there are particular
> features you're in need of, mentioning what they are might help
> push up their priorities in the minds of the developers.

I'm not interested in any particular feature yet. I'm in
process of migrating to some serious Unix RDBMS as need
forces me to and a friend of mine advised Postgres as
technicaly brilliant. I asked merely of curiosity, not need.

Nejc

-- 
''Share and Enjoy.''


Sun, 29 Aug 1999 21:49:01 +0200
Jernej Zajc <jernej@4u.net>
Re: [HACKERS] ANSI SQL compliance
Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Jernej Zajc <jernej@4u.net> writes:
> > is there any rough estimate of when Postgres ANSI SQL compliance
> > is planned to be implemented? Will it be in 6.6, 6.7, or later?
> 
> What do you define as "ANSI compliance"?

Maybe he means stripping of all extensions to ANSI :)

> There isn't any master plan that says "we will have every single
> SQL92 feature implemented by release N".  (In fact, as far as I
> can tell there's no master plan at all ;-).)

AFAIK there is no single dtatbase, commercial or free, that has 
every single feature of SQL92 implemented.

-----------
Hannu

Sun, 29 Aug 1999 23:23:54 +0300
Hannu Krosing <hannu@trust.ee>
Re: [HACKERS] ANSI SQL compliance
> > > is there any rough estimate of when Postgres ANSI SQL compliance
> > > is planned to be implemented? Will it be in 6.6, 6.7, or later?
> > There isn't any master plan that says "we will have every single
> > SQL92 feature implemented by release N".  (In fact, as far as I
> > can tell there's no master plan at all ;-).)
> AFAIK there is no single dtatbase, commercial or free, that has
> every single feature of SQL92 implemented.

Most commercial databases claim SQL92 compliance based on compliance
with the simplest, lowest level defined in the standard. We have many
features of the two higher levels, as well as stong compliance with
the lowest level. We also have significant extensions, some of which
now appearing in the SQL3 draft standard (and pioneered by Postgres).
We claim to be a "extended subset" of the SQL92 standard, which seems
accurate.

As was suggested earlier, you must be more specific about which
features you feel are missing. Some may be coming soon, some may be so
ill-conceived that we would be foolish to damage Postgres by
implementing them, and some may be reasonable to do but farther off in
time.

                      - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart				lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California

Tue, 31 Aug 1999 06:46:04 +0000
Thomas Lockhart <lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu>
Re: [HACKERS] ANSI SQL compliance