From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Patrick Nelson <pnelson(at)neatech(dot)com> |
Cc: | "PostgreSQL List (E-mail)" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Updating based on a join |
Date: | 2002-10-22 13:55:28 |
Message-ID: | 18376.1035294928@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Patrick Nelson <pnelson(at)neatech(dot)com> writes:
> My update is:
> UPDATE db1
> SET dat=(SELECT MIN(dat) FROM db2 WHERE id='A')
> WHERE id='A';
> Which does exactly one record in db1 and I would like them all done. So I
> used the FROM clause like:
> UPDATE db1
> SET dat=c.dat
> FROM (SELECT DISTINCT ON (b.id) a.sym, b.dat FROM db1 a, db2 b WHERE
> a.id=b.id) AS c
> WHERE db1.id=c.id;
Seems messy. Why not
UPDATE db1
SET dat = (SELECT MIN(b.dat) FROM db2 b WHERE db1.id = b.id);
I think this is actually SQL-standard, as well as being more readable;
the form with FROM is definitely not standard.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alice Lottini | 2002-10-22 14:15:57 | looking for documentation about the optimizer |
Previous Message | pilsl | 2002-10-22 13:51:43 | pgacess: cant find libpgctl (no faq !) |