Re: Allow an alias for the target table in UPDATE/DELETE

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Atsushi Ogawa <atsushi(dot)ogawa(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Allow an alias for the target table in UPDATE/DELETE
Date: 2005-12-01 16:05:12
Message-ID: 11388.1133453112@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Atsushi Ogawa <atsushi(dot)ogawa(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> (2)About processing when column identifier of SET clause is specified
> like 'AAA.BBB'. 'AAA' is a composite column now. When an alias for
> target table is supported, 'AAA' is a composite column or a table.
> How do we distinguish these?

You don't, which is why you can't put an alias on a SET target.

Increasing the reserved-ness of SET isn't real attractive either.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-12-01 16:54:41 Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-12-01 15:38:45 Re: Check for integer overflow in datetime functions