| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Troels Arvin <troels(at)arvin(dot)dk>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating |
| Date: | 2004-10-15 16:53:01 |
| Message-ID: | 200410151653.i9FGr1G13296@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > There is only one current standard SQL:2003 correct? The rest are
> > considered deprecated?
>
> The old ones are certainly not "deprecated".
>
> Personally I find the newer versions to be suffering from uncontrolled
> feature bloat and committee-itis.
That was my feeling too. I know many cases the older specifications
were clearer.
Anyway, I think the new "There are three versions of the SQL standard"
wording is OK.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2004-10-18 01:10:24 | Re: SQL 2003 conformance |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-15 16:51:04 | Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating |