Re: Reserved words, double quotes, triggers and Oracle

On 3 Oct 2001 04:14:25 -0700, burdakov_at_vesco.ru (Aleksey Burdakov) wrote:

>
>What are the other DBMSs apart from Oracle which have the same
>keywords problem/restriction ?

IIRC, both Ingres and Informix have reserved words as well. And possibly DB2, although I'm not sure on that one.

>... and won't be telling about that knowledge in this conference ...

:-D

>minimal subset), but stick to some middle point of the range. At the
>same time, we should know more about these extreme points in order to
>more explicitly select the middle point.

That last phrase is why it pays to know what other DB's can do.

>other end - using the minimal subset is unclear: What is the minimal
>subset ? SQL-92, 1999 ? Or what ? Do you have any ideas on that
>subject ?
>

A few years ago SAP was a good example of this extreme: they used the DB as a simple flat file repository. Even to the point of using db tables to store their own indexes. Might as well be using flat files all along! Not anymore, I'm told. But it used to be. Another example is Peoplesoft: it uses its own dictionary and won't even let you create your own special indexes without causing problems. And they assume too little about what can be done at db level.

I once worked with an app that wouldn't allow tables and indexes to be moved away from SYSTEM tablespace and required every object to be owned by user SYSTEM. Talk about NO CLUE as to how to develop with minimal db flexibility...

In general, I'd say that issues related to physical database organization, at the very least, should be transparent from the point of view of app design. I'd also go as far as to say that assuming the universe of relational databases, features like declarative referential integrity should be a given and used. Nowadays, a stored code facility is almost implicit as well. And of course, SQL-92 is almost universal. SQL-99 is probably a bit early to assume as fully supported, but it will happen.

Anything outside of this is basically a question of finding out how much is supported across how many db's and if it is worth the portability cost of using them.

Having said this, it all depends on the market for your app. If it is horizontal, it's good policy to make it very portable. If it is vertical, then it may pay to make it for say, DB2 and ORACLE, and bugger the rest. Between those two, you got 60% of the DB market available to you as potential installs.

But I'm quite sure others will have different views. That's what makes this so interesting.

Cheers
Nuno Souto
nsouto_at_optushome.com.au.nospam Received on Wed Oct 03 2001 - 06:53:03 CDT