Posted by Erland Sommarskog on 06/05/05 17:14

DA Morgan (damorgan@psoug.org) writes:
> Erland Sommarskog wrote:
>> Actually, as long as we are into inner joins, both syntaxes are
>> ANSI-compatible. It is when it comes to outer joins it matter.
>> Here both SQL Server and Oracle have their own propritary operators.
>
> Not true. Oracle has for multiple versions now allowed either ANSI or
> ISO syntax.

I think you misunderstood. I don't question that Oracle has the LEFT
JOIN operator and that. What I was trying to say is that it could be the
case that Oracle's own outer-join operator is not as tainted as the
one of SQL Server, and thus the incentive to use the ANSI syntax would
not be as strong.

But judging from Serge Rideau's post, there are problems with (+)= as well.
Although the *= of SQL Server could still be worse. As a matter of fact,
in SQL 2000, *= will only be available in compatibility mode only.

--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/productdoc/2000/books.asp

• Next in forum: Re: UPDATE/INSERT to make One-to-Many table become One-to-One
• Prev in forum: Re: table/index and page mapping
• Thread view: Re: Code in the database or middle tier (the CLR controversy)

[Reply to this message]