Thread: Analysis/Overview of PostgreSQL and SQL2003
Is anyone working on an analysis of where PostgreSQL
meets, deviates and exceeds the new SQL2003 standard?
If not, I'm going to work on one, but I don't want
to re-invent the wheel. If someone else has done some
of this or wants to do some of this it would be
better to work together.
The goal is publication on General Bits and techdocs.
There is also the possibility of publishing a version in
other more marketing oriented venues.
Contact me if you are interested in working on this
or have work you are willing to share on this.
elein
PS: Sorry for the cross posting
============================================================
elein@varlena.com Varlena, LLC www.varlena.com
1-866-varlena
PostgreSQL Consulting, Support & Training
PostgreSQL General Bits http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/
=============================================================
I have always depended on the [QA] of strangers.
On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 15:17, elein wrote:
> Is anyone working on an analysis of where PostgreSQL
> meets, deviates and exceeds the new SQL2003 standard?
>
> If not, I'm going to work on one, but I don't want
> to re-invent the wheel. If someone else has done some
> of this or wants to do some of this it would be
> better to work together.
>
not sure but I think Troels Arvin has done some comparison, you might
want to contact him directly as I am not sure he follows these lists.
> The goal is publication on General Bits and techdocs.
> There is also the possibility of publishing a version in
> other more marketing oriented venues.
>
Any plans to update the docs as well?
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Robert Treat wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 15:17, elein wrote:
>
>>Is anyone working on an analysis of where PostgreSQL
>>meets, deviates and exceeds the new SQL2003 standard?
>>
>>If not, I'm going to work on one, but I don't want
>>to re-invent the wheel. If someone else has done some
>>of this or wants to do some of this it would be
>>better to work together.
>>
>
>
> not sure but I think Troels Arvin has done some comparison, you might
> want to contact him directly as I am not sure he follows these lists.
>
>
>>The goal is publication on General Bits and techdocs.
>>There is also the possibility of publishing a version in
>>other more marketing oriented venues.
>>
>
>
> Any plans to update the docs as well?
>
> Robert Treat
Elein,
The source package contains an overview of features (ANSI vs. Pg).
However, it is not SQL 2003 yet. Still, I think it can be updated easily.
[hs@fedora postgresql-7.4.2]$ vi src/backend/catalog/sql_features.txt
[hs@fedora postgresql-7.4.2]$ vi
src/backend/catalog/sql_feature_packages.txt
Best regards,
Hans
--
Cybertec Geschwinde u Schoenig
Schoengrabern 134, A-2020 Hollabrunn, Austria
Tel: +43/2952/30706 or +43/664/233 90 75
www.cybertec.at, www.postgresql.at, kernel.cybertec.at
>elein > > Is anyone working on an analysis of where PostgreSQL > meets, deviates and exceeds the new SQL2003 standard? > > If not, I'm going to work on one, but I don't want > to re-invent the wheel. If someone else has done some > of this or wants to do some of this it would be > better to work together. > Sounds great. That would save me looking further into it, so I will be happy to read drafts and ask more detailed questions based upon what you find, or be willing to look at specific parts if you want to chunk out the work. I'm sure you'll get lets of support. Best regards, Simon Riggs
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 12:17:03 -0700, elein wrote: > Is anyone working on an analysis of where PostgreSQL > meets, deviates and exceeds the new SQL2003 standard? That's a rather big analysis, I'm afraid. I have looked at a few areas and written about them here: http://troels.arvin.dk/db/rdbms/ Note that my focus is not PostgreSQL in particular. My todo list at http://troels.arvin.dk/db/rdbms/TODOs.en.html lists some additional areas that I would find interesting to explore next, but it will only happen slowly. > There is also the possibility of publishing a version in > other more marketing oriented venues. That's always a possibility. But don't set your expectations too high: PostgreSQL is actually not as standards-compliant as I, for one, had thought. And the lack of most of SQL:2003's new OLAP features will probably not make a great marketing text, unless some nice people implement them, so that it can be said that the next PostgreSQL version will bring about all this and that new, SQL:2003-compliant feature. > PS: Sorry for the cross posting (This follow-up was sent to advocacy only.) -- Greetings from Troels Arvin, Copenhagen, Denmark