Re: using schema-qualified names in INSERTs - Mailing list pgsql-general

From John D. Burger
Subject Re: using schema-qualified names in INSERTs
Date
Msg-id 859d286e42cbea6293467329814b4ef8@mitre.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: using schema-qualified names in INSERTs  (Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>)
Responses Re: using schema-qualified names in INSERTs  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
> The list of columns can only apply to the table you've just named -
> that's the only thing that makes sense.

That's true for a SELECT from a single table, too, but the qualified
syntax is allowed there.  Also, this is allowed:

   # update testtab set b = testtab.b * 3;

But this isn't:

   # update testtab set testtab.b = testtab.b * 3;

Arguably a tad inconsistent.  I don't know what the OP's rationale was,
but I can imagine that allowing the syntax on INSERT might simplify the
generation of SQL in certain circumstances.  There's also the Principle
of Least Surprise, etc.

- John D. Burger
   MITRE


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Ken Winter"
Date:
Subject: Re: Why does an ON SELECT rule have to be named "_RETURN"?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: using schema-qualified names in INSERTs