On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 03:21:57PM +0200, Paul van Helden scratched on the wall: > On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Black, Michael (IS) > <michael.bla...@ngc.com>wrote: > > > And Oracle says the opposite: > > > > Yet they all give the same answer when done with "update testtable set > > testrow=null where testrow not null; > > You keep hammering this one, it is obvious, I understand, THANKS!
Then why do you keep hammering on the idea that SQLite is somehow incorrect or wrong? You've explained what you're trying to do. We've explained there is a better way to do that, that also happens to provide the correct answer on all platforms, AND likely runs faster-- especially if any of those columns has an index on them. > What if the SET and WHERE contain many columns? Then you're asking for a more complex operation. Your SQL gets a bit more complex as well. > Now I have to add a "WHERE column<>mynewval" for every column in SET > to get the actual changes, something like UPDATE testtable SET col1=?1, > col2=?2, col3=? WHERE <insert> complex where clause > AND col1<>?1 AND col2<>?2 AND col3<>?3. > (passing a null parameter to the above won't even work!) Well, no, it won't, because you're using the wrong operator. Use "WHERE col1 IS NOT ?1 AND..." and it all works fine. > No surprises there. Oracle has never managed to impress me. I know what you mean. That MySQL database they make is difficult to take seriously. -j -- Jay A. Kreibich < J A Y @ K R E I B I.C H > "Intelligence is like underwear: it is important that you have it, but showing it to the wrong people has the tendency to make them feel uncomfortable." -- Angela Johnson _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
