3 ms·

I started working in 1994 and Oracle was already the database provider that did not want to comply with standards (Sql92). They were already greedy.

• hnriot 14y ago
  SQL standards were and are a joke. Real app developers can't wait for the standards boards to ratify a syntax, they have to actually get on and build things. Oracle SQL is what it is, and if you don't like it use something else. The old dream of making the database a commodity and easily switching thanks to the SQL standards was always unrealistic. I doubt that Oracle "didn't want to comply with standards" but what is much more likely was that they had better things to do than pander the syntax nerds. Like making the database faster, more reliable, more secure etc. Like TPC benchmarks, SQL standards have never mattered to real developers.
  • smsm42 14y ago
    Unless you are a real developer that has to write app supporting 4 databases. And you discover that simplest and most common use cases like implementing paginated query results work radically different in each DB and sometimes it's like "oh, you really want to limit result set from 100K-row query and view it piece-by-piece and not all at once? We didn't think about it..."
  • webreac 14y ago
    In 1996, I was using RDB on VAX. The SQL book I was using to help me was a book about SQL92 (not at all about RDB) bought in a small non technical library. Almost all the examples were working perfectly on RDB (and on Microsoft Access). A few years latter, when I had to use Oracle, I was very disappointed to see all the silly differences in syntax.