• danielk1 (1/28/2009)


    I just feel, to tie myself to a DB structure type, like you mentioned using the hierarchcical ID, might limit my application's portability - say, if I want to take it from MS SQL server to MySQL or Oracle or DB2.

    Doing a small amount of coding in order to remain with ISO standard fields, is in my opinion, making for a far better application.

    My 2cents.

    Just double checking... You've never used and will never use CONNECT BY until it becomes part of the ISO Standard. And you never used DATEDIFF until it became part of the standard. And you've never used GETDATE() because it's not part of the standard.

    Here we go again... I can understand that some GUI code might be made to follow ISO standards (heh, depending on which release you're talking about), but since none of the RDBMS vendors are 100% compliant with ISO standards and the very standards themselves tend to lag what's available as powerful extensions to ANSI SQL, I'll just go ahead and start a war by saying that true code portability in the batch world is a myth.

    --Jeff Moden


    RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
    First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
    ________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

    Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.


    Helpful Links:
    How to post code problems
    How to Post Performance Problems
    Create a Tally Function (fnTally)