Doug White wrote:
> Please detail the inaccuracies. The Crashme authors want to know.
It reports MySQL has a SQL 92 VARCHAR type. Since VARCHAR fields are not
allowed to loose trailing spaces, this is not accurate.
It reports PostgreSQL does not have circular foreign keys or an ANSI SQL
identifier quote.
It reports for many databases that they support subqueries, SUM, EXISTS
and GROUP BY. I know that at least Access and PostgreSQL fail the
following query:
SELECT projectnumber,
SUM(workhours)
FROM work
GROUP BY
projectnumber
HAVING EXISTS (
SELECT projectname
FROM projects
WHERE projects.projectnumber = work.projectnumber
AND
SUM(work.workhours) > projects.budget / 200
)
I expect some more databases to fail this one, but according to the
table presented by that crash-me tool it should work.
(I didn't invent this query, it is from the NIST SQL Compliance Test.)
And if we take the text on top "Some tests may fail because the database
in question does not follow ANSI SQL 92 or ODBC 3.0 but in this case we
regard this as a failure in the database." literally, many of the
results are not logical.
Why does the test show that "Calculate 1--1" is supported by databases,
while it is not even a calculation because "--" is the start of a line
of comment in SQL 92?
How can "Function OR as '||'" be a function if SQL 92 says it is the
concatenation operator?
How can " be allowed as a string marker when the SQL spec says it is an
identifier quote?
How can ' be allowed as identifier quote when SQL 92 says it is a string
delimiter?
And as for the completeness, I find the choice of listed functionality
rather curious. Abundant data on ODBC, yet nothing on JDBC, which is
what CF MX uses.
And nothing on OLAP functionality, WITH [RECURSIVE], object facilities,
the information schema, procedural languages and many other high end
features.
All of this is quite understandable since MySQL AB uses crash-me for
regression testing of their own database, and there is little point in
testing things you don't support anyway. But that does mean it gives a
somewhat different result then if you would use the tools any of the
other databases.
Just for a comparison, take a look at the following feature comparison
table and notice how suddenly the product of the company that created
that comparison shines (and check out their SQL validator):
http://developer.mimer.com/validator/comparison/comparison%20chart.tml
Jochem
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4
Subscription:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in
ColdFusion and related topics.
http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
