On 5 Aug 2003, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Tue, 2003-08-05 at 14:42, Stephan Szabo wrote: > > On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, scott.marlowe wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 5 Aug 2003, Williams, Travis L, NPONS wrote: > > > > > > > I have a table (lets say a,text b,text) and I want to insert the data > > > > jim,jimmy and trav,travis can I do this with 1 insert into statement > > > > instead of 2? > > > > > > Not with the current implementation of insert. There's been some > > > discussion of adding the multiple tuple insert seen in other databases, > > > but I don't think anyone's actually done it or even agreed on exactly how > > > to do it. I'm not sure if SQL 3 covers this, it seems like it hints at > > > it, but I can't read that stuff all that well most of the time. > > > > > > I don't think there's a way right now though, without using some form of > > > copy. > > > > Well, you can do it with insert ... select and union. > > > > insert into tab > > select 'jim', 'jimmy' > > union > > select 'trav', 'travis'; > > But the bottom line question is "why do it it in the 1st place?". > Multiple INSERT commands works like a peach, as does COPY from stdin > (thanks again, Jason).
Some constraints might make such things meaningful when compared to multiple inserts (for example, immediate checked self-referential foreign keys where you might want to insert a row and the row it depends on in a single statement). Copy should work, but that's fairly different than inserts (if only because inserts are likely to work on other systems). ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly