Re: Inquiry From Form [pgsql]

From: Ian Barwick <barwick(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Paul Hubbard <phubbard(at)largo(dot)com>, info(at)pgsql(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Inquiry From Form [pgsql]
Date: 2003-06-19 07:19:32
Message-ID: 200306190919.32586.barwick@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On Wednesday 18 June 2003 22:44, Paul Hubbard wrote:
> Please help. I\'m looking for anything that says \"PostgreSQL is SQL92
> complient\" for my boss. Can you get me anything?

You may want to look at this:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/view.php?version=7.3&idoc=0&file=features.html

"Appendix C. SQL Conformance"

especially:
"SQL92 defined three feature sets for conformance: Entry, Intermediate, and
Full. Most database products claiming SQL standard conformance were
conforming at only the Entry level, since the entire set of features in the
Intermediate and Full levels was either too voluminous or in conflict with
legacy behaviors."

which I would translate to "there is no such thing as a 100% SQL-92
compliant database". I may be wrong; maybe someone with more
detailed knowledge of the standards can correct me.

The same page also has a detailed list of supported and unsupported
features from SQL 99. While a large number are not implemented in
PostgreSQL I would suggest its price / conformance relationship is
excellent.

HTH

Ian Barwick
barwick(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2003-06-19 15:53:40 Trumpeting 7.4 ... or not?
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2003-06-19 01:18:04 PostgreSQL & SQL Compliance