On Aug 8, 8:42*am, lyle fairfield <lyle.fairfi...@gmail.comwrote:
I don't see this as a deficiency in any SQL language but a deficiency
in the Access query dialog/wizard.
Just to clarify -- I originally wrote the query in a SQL text editor,
not Access' query builder. I ended up manually converting it to a join
and it worked expediently...which, again, is preferable to the IN
(subquery) deal anyway.
I definitely agree that Access has its own specific deficiencies with
query processing, but some of them wouldn't be a problem to solve in
the first place if SQL were a better language. SQL is still the best
thing we have, but there seems to have been no motivation over the
past 15 years for the major DB vendors to truly improve it by making
it more relational and have a more consistent syntax (e.g. QUEL). They
obviously have other fad-driven priorities like XML support (yuck) and
creating things like LINQ (puke), instead of increasing the leveraging
of logic and set mathematics.
Well, I suppose this thread is leaning heavily towards
comp.databases.theory now :)