On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:47 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Merlin Moncure <mmonc...@gmail.com> writes: >> 2) I often wish that you could reference the table (or it's alias) >> directly as the field list. > >> UPDATE foo f set f = (...)::foo; >> or even >> UPDATE foo SET foo = foo; > > Hm. You could get there with this syntax as long as you didn't mind > writing out the field list explicitly. Arguments why you should > want to do that are the same as for avoiding "SELECT *", with maybe > a bit more urgency since at least SELECT * won't trash your data > if you get it wrong. However, assuming that that argument doesn't > impress you ... > > My draft copy of SQL99 mentions a syntax > > UPDATE table SET ROW = <row-valued expression> [ WHERE ... ] > > which does not appear in later editions of the spec, and probably wasn't > in SQL99 final either (since SQL:2003 does not mention it as a removed > feature). I'm not sure we'd want to implement that; it would require > making ROW into a fully-reserved word, which it is not today, and that > seems rather a high price for implementing a not-per-spec feature. > But I don't think your suggestions of the table name or alias work; > they could conflict with an actual column name.
Presumably it'd follow similar rules to SELECT -- resolve the column name in the face of ambiguity. merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
