Re: Oracle licence question

> I still have noticed that the majority of 'SQL Server developers' I have
> met use T-SQL when a single SQL statement will suffice.

I think most people who work within the database professional will tell you inexperienced developers prefer to code using cursors, thats not a vendor thing, its simply because thats the experience they have and its how 3gl, 4gl languages tend to work.

Now if you are saying nobody in Oracle uses cursors, well, I think I would have to fall off my chair laughing.

Getting developers to think in sets is difficult, I mean - did you start your SQL career with the full ability to write complex queries with derived tables, sub-queries etc... or did, like most, learn through experience and training?

The last Oracle developer I met thought it was a bug in SQL Server that you could do this...

BEGIN TRAN CREATE TABLE .... ROLLBACK TRAN He just couldn't get his head round DDL transactions.

-- 
Tony Rogerson
SQL Server MVP
http://sqlserverfaq.com - free video tutorials


"HansF" <News.Hans_at_telus.net> wrote in message 
news:pan.2006.02.26.20.36.07.87771_at_telus.net...


> On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:57:04 +0000, Tony Rogerson wrote:

>

>>

>> But to reiterate the original point - a good database professional will,

>> given a problem try and code it to FIPS 127-2 FULL (ANSI 92) and if it

>> doesn't perform well enough will then look at vendor extensions. If you 

>> are

>> writing an application that needs to run on SQL Server, Oracle and DB2 

>> then

>> you need to write portable SQL, that seems to be lost on HansF and 

>> probably

>> DA too.

>

>

> If it were at the SQL level, I'd be OK with portability.  A SQL statement

> is a SQL statement right? <LOL>

>

> I still have noticed that the majority of 'SQL Server developers' I have

> met use T-SQL when a single SQL statement will suffice.

>

> The demands that defeat portability are at the series of statements

> (transactional) level. In which case you must start understanding the

> behaviour of the database. And code the set of SQL statements to that

> behaviour.  Which varies by vendor. Which seems to be lost on you.

>

> Looking forward to your response - but I will be going back to meaningful

> work for a while so you have the last word.  Make it a good, scathing, 

> one.

>

> -- 

> Hans Forbrich

> Canada-wide Oracle training and consulting

> mailto: Fuzzy.GreyBeard_at_gmail.com

> *** Top posting [replies] guarantees I won't respond. ***

>