I find the comments in initsplan.c as following.
/* * Presently the executor cannot support FOR UPDATE/SHARE marking of * rels appearing on the nullable side of an
outerjoin. (It's * somewhat unclear what that would mean, anyway: what should we * mark when a result row is
generatedfrom no element of the * nullable relation?) So, complain if target rel is FOR UPDATE/SHARE. * It's
sufficientto make this check once per rel, so do it only * if rel wasn't already known nullable. */
IIRC, SQL:2003 also says the nullable side is not updatable, since it is not
key-preserved. See 7.12 <query specification> of ISO/IEC 9075-2:2003.
And I also got the idea from Oracle's SQL manual.
"Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote
news:200508110843.12819.josh@agliodbs.com...
> Folks,
>
> ------------------------------
> SQL statement<select t0.po_number, t0.po_site_id, t0.po_supp_id,
> t1.pol_number,
> t1.pol_po_id, t1.pol_balance, t1.pol_qty, t1.pol_p_id, t1.pol_message,
> t1.pol_de
> ldate from s_purchase_order t0 left outer join s_purchase_orderline
> t1 on t0.
> po_number = t1.pol_po_id where t0.po_number = ? for update > with
> input values
> :java.lang.Integer:30239.
> Please examine the SQLException for more information.
> NestedException: java.sql.SQLException: ERROR: SELECT FOR UPDATE cannot
> be applied to the nullable side of an outer join
> -----------------------------
>
> So, my question is: why can't we apply FOR UPDATE to an outer join? Is
this
> defined in the SQL Spec?
>
> --
> Josh Berkus
> Aglio Database Solutions
> San Francisco
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
