Detailed SQL Standard conformance #2442
Conversation
|
This change is |
|
Great first step! Can you remove the "??" ? Let's go ahead and label those as "No." Also, is it possible to filter this list? Could someone just look at what we do or don't support? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM as a first step!
@awoods187, I can look into adding the ability to filter in a follow-up PR.
@Amruta-Ranade, @awoods187, do we want to add this for 1.1 docs as well, or just for 2.0?
|
Let's go ahead and mark it for 1.1 Makes sense re filter follow up |
|
We shouldn't just copy the same file from 2.0 to 1.1 - some of those checkboxes won't be the same. Unless someone wants to go through and make sure that all the differences are noted I think it would be better to start this page in 2.0 and update it going forward. |
|
|
||
| ## Overview | ||
|
|
||
| This page lists which SQL standard features are supported, partially-supported, and unsupported by CockroachDB. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd suggest simplifying this page by removing the toc and Overview headingh and starting the page with this:
This page outlines to what extent CockroachDB conforms to the current SQL standard.
- Feature ID ...
- Description ...
- CockroachDB Support ...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Applies also the 1.1 version of the page.
|
Makes sense to me, @bdarnell. @Amruta-Ranade, let's just remove this content from 1.1 docs. Sorry to cause confusion here. |
@jseldess @awoods187
This is the first draft of the SQL Standard compatibility matrix - just making sure I am on the right track.
I was considering breaking up the table into three tables: supported, unsupported, and partially-supported features. Thoughts?