Re: Using both MS SQL and Oracle

From: Joe Maloney <mpir_at_bellsouth.net>
Date: 18 May 2001 07:58:11 -0700
Message-ID: <d17bad25.0105180658.640d5b8a_at_posting.google.com>


Oracle pre-O9i uses essentially SQL-89, MS/SS uses what is closer to SQL-92. If you can write the old style SQL, it tends to work on both. Notice I said 'tends'. I work with both and get bit every once in a while.

Not true for stored procedures (code is very very different), but if you use the Java equivalent of ODBC passthru, then you can have a stored procedure in each database that is called the same name and way. Twice the code maintenance but that was not an issue.

The SQL issue is about to change with O9i. Apparently, from what I have been able to read, Oracle has tried to get to SQL-99 ('case' structures and all). As I write this, O9i is due out next week, so I can't speak from experience, yet....

"Daniel A. Morgan" <dmorgan_at_exesolutions.com> wrote in message news:<3B00B5B0.5EAFEBA8_at_exesolutions.com>...
> Lee Miller wrote:
>
> > Huh? since when is Transact-SQL a flavor of VBA?
> >
> > And yes, Bryon as others have said it can be done. The SQL can be vastly
> > different (at least in my Experience with Oracle 7.3 and SQL Server 6.5 it
> > is). Particularly joins and other aggregate queries. Even the invocation
> > of stored procedures is different 'exec' under SQL server and 'execute'
> > under Oracle. So using stored procedures to hide the differences in code is
> > not as simple as you may think.
> >
>
> I slight correct to what you wrote if I may be permitted.
>
> It is not a case of the SQL "can" be vastly different but rather a case of the
> SQL "will" be vastly different and "should" be vastly different. About the only
> place the two products are close is in the way Microsoft hypes its product in
> its advertising to blur the distinction.
>
> Daniel A. Morgan
Received on Fri May 18 2001 - 16:58:11 CEST

Original text of this message