Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance

From: Dan Langille <dan(at)langille(dot)org>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>,pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance
Date: 2004-02-27 12:35:16
Message-ID: 20040227073459.M31900@xeon.unixathome.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Josh Berkus wrote:

> Chris,
>
> > Claims of "conformance" are a bit specious when there isn't much of a
> > standards body on this anymore.  And vendors that consider themselves
> > commercially important are quite prepared to ignore standards whenever
> > it seems convenient.
>
> Yeah, why do you think they disbanded the compliance team in the first place?
> Just ask Joe Celko ....

I haven't spoken with Joe in years.. why don't you tell us?

-- 
Dan Langille - BSDCan: http://www.bsdcan.org/

In response to

Responses

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2004-02-27 14:29:24
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal
Previous:From: Troels ArvinDate: 2004-02-27 08:53:45
Subject: Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group