Hans-J�rgen Sch�nig wrote:
> Neil Conway wrote:
> > Robert Treat wrote:
> >
> >> Actually i believe people want both syntax's as the former is used by
> >> oracle and the latter by db2 (iirc)
> >
> >
> > I think the past consensus has been to adopt the SQL standard syntax. Is
> > there any reason to also support the Oracle syntax other than for
> > compatibility? (And if that is it, I think it's a pretty flimsy reason.)
> >
> > -Neil
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
>
>
> Neil,
>
> Compatibility is the ONLY reason and it is related to money (the only
> language people understand).
> We have done a lot of migration here and I can tell you that support for
> Oracle style CONNECT BY would make more people happy than the SQL style
> syntax.
> The reason for that is very simple: Code can be migrated without any
> changes (= without introducing potential bugs).
> I know that SQL standards are tremendously important but if there is an
> easy way to support Oracle syntax as well this is definitely the
> preferred way to go.
> I think it is important not to think in dogmas (in this case this means
> SQL syntax is always better) - there should be a reasonable compromise
> between compatibility and standard.
> My compromise would be: Support both syntaxes if possible.
I can see your point, but imagine if we had Oracle compatibility for
lots of cases --- our system would have either non-standard or duplicate
ways of doing things, and that would be quite confusing.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
