Full Outer Join?

[k***@gmail.com]

Hi All !

Is Full Outer Join is supported by Sybase ASE 12.x? If yes, can someone
please explain me what syntax is to be used?

Thanks.

[ZeldorBlat]

Post by k***@gmail.com
Hi All !
Is Full Outer Join is supported by Sybase ASE 12.x? If yes, can someone
please explain me what syntax is to be used?
Thanks.

Nope -- yet another feature that Sybase does not support directly.

[David Kerber]

Post by ZeldorBlat

Post by k***@gmail.com
Hi All !
Is Full Outer Join is supported by Sybase ASE 12.x? If yes, can someone
please explain me what syntax is to be used?
Thanks.

Nope -- yet another feature that Sybase does not support directly.

Sybase's Adaptive Server Anywhere (AKA SQLAnywhere) does.

[ZeldorBlat]

Post by David Kerber

Post by ZeldorBlat

Post by k***@gmail.com
Hi All !
Is Full Outer Join is supported by Sybase ASE 12.x? If yes, can someone
please explain me what syntax is to be used?
Thanks.

Nope -- yet another feature that Sybase does not support directly.

Sybase's Adaptive Server Anywhere (AKA SQLAnywhere) does.
--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

So, in other words, Sybase feels that features like full outer joins
(which are supported by most other database servers) is only useful in
"database-powered applications for mobile, remote, and small- to
medium-sized business environments" (ASA) but /not/ in
"mission-critical, transaction-intensive applications" (ASE).

[Larry Coon]

Post by ZeldorBlat
So, in other words, Sybase feels that features like full outer joins
(which are supported by most other database servers) is only useful in
"database-powered applications for mobile, remote, and small- to
medium-sized business environments" (ASA) but /not/ in
"mission-critical, transaction-intensive applications" (ASE).

I'd say it's more a case of buying a product that already
supported FOJ (which became ASA) while continuing to offer
their own product that did not (directly) support FOJ (ASE).

But since a FOJ is a union of a LOJ and a ROJ, we're not
talking about a lack of -support- here, we're talking about
a lack of a keyword.


Larry Coon
University of California

[Rob Verschoor]

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.

[Galen Boyer]

Post by Rob Verschoor

Post by Larry Coon

Post by ZeldorBlat
So, in other words, Sybase feels that features like full outer
joins (which are supported by most other database servers) is only
useful in "database-powered applications for mobile, remote, and
small- to medium-sized business environments" (ASA) but /not/ in
"mission-critical, transaction-intensive applications" (ASE).

I'd say it's more a case of buying a product that already
supported FOJ (which became ASA) while continuing to offer
their own product that did not (directly) support FOJ (ASE).
But since a FOJ is a union of a LOJ and a ROJ, we're not
talking about a lack of -support- here, we're talking about
a lack of a keyword.
Larry Coon
University of California

Indeed. And there are other ways to simulate a full outer join as
well. If you have a copy of my book "Tips, Tricks & Recipes for
Sybase ASE", see section 6.2.5 for an example.

Is there a standard on _how_ the database is supposed to support the
syntax?

One cannot check against the nullability of the outer join restrictions
within the select clause, plus, they don't support inline views (except,
I believe it the most latest version), so, I'm almost always forced into
a temp table solution when using outer joins, no matter what the syntax.

Its quite a bit frustrating, because I'm allowed to do other expressions
on the select list, such as CASE statements, but if an outer join is
involved, I'm not allowed to perform expressions on the nullability.