http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2007/query-uses-nonansi-outerjoin/ SQL Server Performance Tuning Fri, 17 May 2013 13:31:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2007/query-uses-nonansi-outerjoin/#comment-543 =8)-DX Mon, 22 Aug 2011 12:49:01 +0000 http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?=920#comment-543 To answer mike bo: As far as I can best tell, this is because this syntax does not provide sufficient accuracy (it’s ambiguous), the results of such a query can be different based on how the query optimiser chooses to perform the join, furthermore this syntax does not allow for the same complexity of joins and also due to the fact that it is better to have a unified syntax for all the types of joins and various db operations, instead of several operators with only partial functionality.
As for your “Easier to read/easier to make” argument – that is I think just what you happen to be used to, for me this syntax is much more difficult to read in a complex query, because it is easy to miss a single star and worse for writing queries, because I can’t specify exactly the behaviour I want.

]]> http://www.sql-server-performance.com/2007/query-uses-nonansi-outerjoin/#comment-372 mike bo Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:32:04 +0000 http://www.sql-server-performance.com/?=920#comment-372 Why remove a syntax which is better in every way then the damn outer join syntax that sucks balls. Easier to read a query, easier to make sql queries in all aspects. Why remove something great and keep the old ways of doing.

]]>