Comments on: Back to basics: cross joins

By: suman

suman — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 15:34:34 +0000

The site quickly helps to improve my knowledge

By: jabber

jabber — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:04:27 +0000

Very detailled information about sql syntax and sql injection here: http://www.sqlexikon.de, this site is in german, so don’t waste your time, if that language is a problem for you

By: Eddie Awad

Eddie Awad — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 23:58:12 +0000

My wife Jasmine is a SQL Server developer (Yes, we are an example of Oracle and Microsoft living under the same roof). One additional reason I want to use the ANSI style is to make it easier for me to “communicate” with Jasmine when speaking SQL

By: William Robertson

William Robertson — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 13:41:16 +0000

Well, I really like the explicit ANSI style, and like Eddie I'm using it as my main way of writing joins. I find it a lot clearer, and it's harder to miss one and get a Cartesian product by mistake.

I used the other style for well over 10 years before this came along, so I don't really buy the "but I'm used to the other way" argument.

Oracle WTF: Joins Explained

By: Graham Oakes

Graham Oakes — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 07:59:22 +0000

Patrick, I’m with you. The only time I’ve used the new standards so far was when I needed a ‘full outer join’ in Ansi speak.

It will take a lot of effort to change and if there’s no tangible benefit then it falls way down my list of priorities.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 07:45:55 +0000

I think it’s a big step for most people (including myself) to abandon the old syntax and start using the SQL92 (or is it SQL99??) standards. I haven’t seen it in the wild yet, anyway.

I’m curious what Oracle’s statement is. Have they included it for compatibilty to newer standards? Or will they push the usage of this syntax?