Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance
Date
Msg-id 200402270905.48070.josh@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance  (Dan Langille <dan@langille.org>)
Responses Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance
List pgsql-advocacy
Dan,

> > > 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?

I thought it was self-evident from my statement.    The largest vendors
weren't happy with their scores on SQL compliance, and by the late 90's had
come to dominate the SQL committee.   So they eliminated conformance testing
so that Oracle, SQL Server, etc. wouldn't look so bad.

And Joe resigned the committee ... probably over that and other things.

--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: Dan Langille
Date:
Subject: Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance
Next
From: Dan Langille
Date:
Subject: Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance