Well, with your 5 gig table, the select statement needs to still compile a
set of results somehow, be it data or pointers to the data, and remember
which row has been read. As I said, I've never looked or traced the code,
but something has be be created somewhere that says "This is the next
record
ep to select and update the same table
SQL will not do the trick for me because I based on the select I have to
perform other operations(queries on other tables) and only then can I update
the table in question.
Kees Nuyt wrote:
>
> There is no need to do this in a loop with a cursor.
> Whe
SQL will not do the trick for me because I based on the select I have to
perform other operations(queries on other tables) and only then can I update
the table in question.
Kees Nuyt wrote:
>
> There is no need to do this in a loop with a cursor.
> Whenever possible, use the power of SQL set ope
On 8 Nov 2010, at 9:27pm, Stephen Chrzanowski wrote:
> I don't know how the code works, but logically speaking, if I'm at row B,
> and I update row B to E, row B physically remains B but has its data content
> changed to E. From there on in, it should go on to C then D then F, etc.
And naturall
On Sun, 7 Nov 2010 10:14:29 -0800 (PST), cricketfan
wrote:
>Just to make things clearer
>the value being fetched into ref from the database, is also the value being
>changed(ghi) in the update statement. When I change my query (just to debug)
>to update some other column in the table the whole th
I don't know how the code works, but logically speaking, if I'm at row B,
and I update row B to E, row B physically remains B but has its data content
changed to E. From there on in, it should go on to C then D then F, etc.
Since the full rowset results already exist somewhere, it shouldn't show
On 8 Nov 2010, at 2:02am, cricketfan wrote:
> Simon, As per my understanding I am getting the result set and trying to
> change values in the table based on what I read from the result set up to
> that point. I see no reason why I should be stopped from updating the row I
> have already read in t
Simon, As per my understanding I am getting the result set and trying to
change values in the table based on what I read from the result set up to
that point. I see no reason why I should be stopped from updating the row I
have already read in the result set.
Simon Slavin-3 wrote:
>
>
> On 7 N
On 7 Nov 2010, at 6:14pm, cricketfan wrote:
> Just to make things clearer
> the value being fetched into ref from the database, is also the value being
> changed(ghi) in the update statement. When I change my query (just to debug)
> to update some other column in the table the whole thing runs fi
Just to make things clearer
the value being fetched into ref from the database, is also the value being
changed(ghi) in the update statement. When I change my query (just to debug)
to update some other column in the table the whole thing runs fine and runs
only once!
Can someone throw some light o
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 21:29:58 -0700 (PDT), cricketfan
wrote:
>I am trying to select some columns from a table and use that to
>update another column in the same table using prepare/step/reset/finalize
>methods. However, when I use the update statement while stepping it is
>executing the flo
On 7 Nov 2010, at 4:29am, cricketfan wrote:
>I am trying to select some columns from a table and use that to
> update another column in the same table using prepare/step/reset/finalize
> methods. However, when I use the update statement while stepping it is
> executing the flow 2 times.
Hello,
I am trying to select some columns from a table and use that to
update another column in the same table using prepare/step/reset/finalize
methods. However, when I use the update statement while stepping it is
executing the flow 2 times. In order to clarify, I am pasting some pseudo
13 matches
Mail list logo
