> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 20 February 2003 14:31 > To: Hannu Krosing > Cc: Dave Cramer; Peter Eisentraut; Pgsql Hackers > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] request for sql3 compliance for the > update command > > > Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Are you against it just on grounds of cleanliness and ANSI > compliance, > > or do you see more serious problems in letting it in ? > > At this point it seems there are two different things being > tossed about. I originally understood Dave to be asking for > parens to be allowed around individual target column names, > which seems a useless frammish to me. What Bruce has pointed > out is that a syntax that lets you assign multiple columns > from a single rowsource would be an actual improvement in > functionality, or at least in convenience and efficiency. (It > would also be a substantial bit of work, which is why I think > this isn't what Dave was offering a quick patch to do...) > What I'd like to know right now is which interpretation > Informix actually implements. > > I don't like adding nonstandard syntaxes that add no > functionality --- but if Informix has done what Bruce is > talking about, that's a different matter altogether.
Informix SE allows me to do: CREATE TABLE djp(col1 INTEGER, col2 INTEGER) INSERT INTO djp VALUES(1, 2) UPDATE djp SET(col1, col2) = (3, 4) However UPDATE djp SET(col1, col2) = (SELECT col2, col1 FROM djp) Results in a syntax error. I don't have Informix IDS so I don't know if that can do it. Regards, Dave. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
