Re: This is our slashdot coverage?
От | Dan Scott |
---|---|
Тема | Re: This is our slashdot coverage? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | fbb0d11d0612062033m3999f090jb3da108376d474d2@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: This is our slashdot coverage? (Gavin Sherry <swm@linuxworld.com.au>) |
Ответы |
Re: This is our slashdot coverage?
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On 06/12/06, Gavin Sherry <swm@linuxworld.com.au> wrote: > On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Luke Lonergan wrote: > > > Josh, > > > > On 12/5/06 7:17 PM, "Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > > > > > Depends. Read it another way, it implies that the only reason we're not > > > better than DB2 and Oracle in every way is the lack of windowing > > > functions. Wouldn't that be nice? > > > > And we're building the windowing functions as fast as we can ;-) > > > > Yep! > > The mention of window functions is weird though. DB2 does not support > window functions AFAIK. Oracle is the only all purpose database that does. > > Gavin Nah. DB2 for Linux, UNIX, Windows has supported window functions since Version 8 -- three years or so. IBM refers to them as "OLAP functions". A great little resource for comparing SQL capabilities is http://troels.arvin.dk/db/rdbms/ -- see http://troels.arvin.dk/db/rdbms/#select-limit for a discussion of windowing functions. The official IBM documentation is at (huge URL warning): http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/db2luw/v9/topic/com.ibm.db2.udb.admin.doc/doc/r0023461.htm Dan
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: