Re: [PATCHES] extension for sql update - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Susanne Ebrecht
Subject Re: [PATCHES] extension for sql update
Date
Msg-id 1154071816.4819.22.camel@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] extension for sql update  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Am Donnerstag, den 27.07.2006, 08:30 -0400 schrieb Tom Lane:
> Susanne Ebrecht <miracee@miracee.de> writes:
> > ... We could provide the mixed update syntax and leave the
> > typed row value expression for the next release. Do you agree?
>
> I don't really see the point --- the patch won't provide any new
> functionality in anything like its current form, because you can
> always just write the separate expressions in the simple one to
> one way.  If we do offer the row-on-the-left syntax then people
> will try to put sub-selects on the right, and won't get anything
> beyond an unhelpful "syntax error" message.  So my vote would be
> to leave it alone until we have a more complete implementation.

Look at my intention, why I wrote this patch:
In recent years I migrated many customers applications from oracle or
informix to postgresql. Every time it was a very painful and annoying
job to grep through the code of functions and the whole software, to
find all updates and change them manually.

Far ago at university, I learned both syntax as standard syntax.
Example:
set a=1, b=2, c=3
and
set (a,b,c)=(1,2,3)

I admit, I prefered the second form, too, when I only used informix and
it seems also my customers do so.

Still now, I never found this syntax with select statement. I am not
sure if this is possible with informix or oracle.

regards

Susanne


>
>             regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: GUC with units, details
Next
From: "Charles Duffy"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] putting CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS in qsort_comparetup()