Re: [HACKERS] Enhancing PGSQL to be compatible with Informix SQL

From: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
To: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Ansley, Michael" <Michael(dot)Ansley(at)intec(dot)co(dot)za>, "'Rod Chamberlin '" <rod(at)querix(dot)com>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org '" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Enhancing PGSQL to be compatible with Informix SQL
Date: 2000-01-07 21:35:52
Message-ID: 3.0.1.32.20000107133552.00ee2b44@mail.pacifier.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 12:00 AM 1/7/00 -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>> > select ...
>> > from t1 inner join t4 on t1.x=t4.x,
>> > t2 left outer join t1
>> > on t2.y=t1.y and
>> > (t1.start_date between t2.start_date and t1.start_date),
>> > t3 left outer join t1 on t3.x=t1.x and t3.y = t1.y;
>>
>> Let's be honest, folks. This is almost unreadable. I think we will
>> need some simpler way to access _outer_ in addition to the ANSI way.

Well...it took a minute to digest the Oracle version, too. Most joins
are far simpler than the example.

>How do the "books" talk about JOINs? What is the semi-standard syntax
>that is generally used in samples?

"SQL for smarties" gives examples of vendor-specific syntax then talks
about outer joins more abstractly. It also points out that the existing
vendor solutions have weaknesses.

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Don Baccus 2000-01-07 21:45:58 Re: [HACKERS] Enhancing PGSQL to be compatible with Informix SQL
Previous Message Lamar Owen 2000-01-07 21:21:13 Re: [HACKERS] [Fwd: Re: First Major Open Source Database]