On Thu, 25 Feb 1999, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
> This is a very important question for PostgreSQL as a whole. Does anyone
> know what is missing to claim SQL92 compliance? I can get my higher-ups
> to agree that we should adopt software based on it's conformance to
> existing standards, to avoid the proprietary lock-in problem. This is
> usually my strategy for getting Open Source software in ;-) since it
> conforms so much better (usually) When I discovered PostgrSQL is a
> little short in that department, I've had to mumble and hand-wave a
> little.
While it may take a little research to make a comprehensive listing, the
SQL command and keyword lists in the PostgreSQL Users' Manual list what
compatibility there is with SQL92 or SQL3, as well as what keywords are
available in PostgreSQL versus the standard.
Brett W. McCoy
http://www.lan2wan.com/~bmccoy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing.
-- Wernher von Braun
----- BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK -----
Version: 3.12
GAT dpu s:-- a C++++ UL++++$ P+ L+++ E W++ N- o K- w--- O@ M-@ !V PS+++
PE Y+ PGP- t++ 5- X+ R+@ tv b+++ DI+++ D+ e>++ h+ r++ y++++
------ END GEEK CODE BLOCK ------
