Re: feature & performance comparison

Oracle submissions dominated SQL92, partly by being heavily involved in the test suites. With SQL99, we submitted the OO features we shipped in 1995 (on DB2 for Windows, AIX, Solaris, HP, etc.) and over 80% of IBM's submissions were accepted. It seems that the company that invests the most in a particular iteration of the standard has the most influence. This is reasonable I think.

"IBM's recent foray into the RDBMS market outside of mainframes" started in 1988, and reached Unix in 1993.

Nuno Souto wrote:

> On Sat, 09 Jun 2001 22:08:20 -0400, Serge Rielau <srielau_at_ca.ibm.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Examples (And these are just things I happened to bump into, random sampling):
>
> I suggest you do a little bit more than just a random sampling. Too
> complex a subject to deserve such a light approach, don't you think?
>
> >There is good reason why IBM (and thus DB2) dominates the standards.
> >
>
> Do they? I wasn't aware standards were something to be "dominated"?
>
> >Oracle touts that it supports standards. It doesn't seem to care about the SQL
> >standard even for new features (such as object tables), however.....
> >Interesting.
>
> Probably because it had those features in place long before there was
> a standard defined anywhere?
>
> Rest assured they'll follow the standards in time. One of the little
> penalties one has to pay for using software that is way ahead of the
> "standards".
>
> ></flame>
>
> 'sohright, we won't hold you to that! :-D
>
> Cheers
> Nuno Souto
> nsouto_at_bigpond.net.au.nospam
> http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/the_Den/index.html
  Received on Sun Jun 10 2001 - 20:47:27 CDT