Re: Is Oracle SQL99 Compliant?

In article <34q2tiF49iiv3U1_at_individual.net>, Serge Rielau says...
>
>nitin2276_at_gmail.com wrote:
>> Ya, Oracle is following SQL99 standards. So it is SQL99 compliant.
>>>From the release of Oracle 9i onwards, Oracle has also started
>> following ANSI standards.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nitin
>>
>> seapearl1023_at_ms65.url.com.tw wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>My question is if Oracle Standard version is SQL99 Compliant? How
>>
>> about
>>
>>>Oracle Enterprise version?
>>>
>>>Thanks.
>>>
>>>Hai-Chu
>>
>>
>I beg to differ. What about NULL = '', Trigger/RI semantics?

what about null = <anything>. it is unknown:

ops$tkyte_at_ORA9IR2> select * from dual where null = ''; no rows selected  

ops$tkyte_at_ORA9IR2> select * from dual where null <> ''; no rows selected

where is the problem there? there is the fact that '' is null upon insert, but that is not NULL=''.

actually, Oracle was the first database every to complete NIST sql92 certification (i know, i was on the team that did it, i had the shirt and all)....

Oracle doesn't and didn't have a FRED that describe the differences between the umpteen releases on every platform (that would be db2 and all of its "family of db productions, some 7 or 8 relational database and who knows how many non-relational...)

and you do know that there is nary a vendor that can even begin to partially sort of claim "sql-99 we got it all compliance" right?

>While Oracle does implement many SQL-99 features it has
>a) numerous extensions that are unlikely to ever make it into the
>standard because they don't adhere to the foundation of SQL

but make it run really fast. If we were truly all the "same" what would be the point?

and why does "going way above and beyond" mean "bad thing"?

>b) mumerous idiosynchrecies which break portability (like NULL = '').
>

lets talk concurrency controls sometime -- which basically prohit portability for any real app with more than about 10 lines of code that include "insert, update, delete or merge".

oh but wait, lets try to port our DB2 mainframe app to db2 "udb" -- without change, all of the time. portability within the same "product" should be "easy" no?

>.. at least SQL Server adds ANSI compatibility knobs. Oracle doesn't
>even care that much.

fips flaggers don't count? not sure where you were going here?

how many NIST certs did db2 get before NIST stopped doing it?

>
>Cheers
>Serge

-- 
Thomas Kyte
Oracle Public Sector
http://asktom.oracle.com/
opinions are my own and may not reflect those of Oracle Corporation