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

Re: SQL key word list and SQL:2011

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL key word list and SQL:2011
Date: 2012-05-21 13:18:54
Message-ID: CA+U5nM+o=fgLJhKWdKfjmfZ5D0sVPq6OLdSiWz6kX4UmHWLUmg@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
On 19 May 2012 14:00, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:

> What I'd suggest is that we keep only the SQL:2011 column.  The
> differences from 2003 to 2011 aren't that great that it's very useful to
> analyze  the differences, and 1999 and 1992 are really only of
> archeological interest.

The SQL:2011 standard replaces previous standards, so I agree: we
should only list the current version of the standard. The previous
versions of the standard are simply no longer relevant.

If people want that, we could have a little text at bottom saying
Changes between 2008 and 2011 etc.. if that really is interesting -
and if it really is then it should be listed as incompatibilities in
the release notes.

-- 
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-05-21 16:09:25
Subject: Re: ALTER TABLE ... CLUSTER ON synopsis
Previous:From: Dan McGeeDate: 2012-05-21 10:11:34
Subject: Re: Observation on integer types documentation

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