Re: request for sql3 compliance for the update command

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dave Cramer <dave(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: request for sql3 compliance for the update command
Date: 2003-02-20 04:16:17
Message-ID: 200302200416.h1K4GHI20142@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


Agreed folks are going to have bigger problems from Informix than just
this, and in fact I used Informix for years and didn't know they allowed
this.

However, what solution do we have for UPDATE (coll...) = (select val...)
for folks? It is awkward to repeat a query multiple times in an UPDATE.

I think it makes sense to add it only if it adds functionality.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> > As a thought, will it add significant maintenance penalties or be
> > detrimental?
>
> Well, yes it will if you look at the big picture. In the past we've
> generally regretted it when we put in nonstandard features just to be
> compatible with some other database. (Tatsuo already pointed out the
> "foo = NULL" fiasco.) And we get ragged on regularly for the non-SQL-
> standard features we've inherited from Berkeley Postgres (eg, the
> implicit-FROM frammish that was under discussion yesterday).
>
> I don't think we're really doing the users any favor either. If they
> want to move to some other database after Postgres, are they likely to
> get that other database to insert a not-very-useful nonstandard syntax?
> Sooner or later they're going to have to bite this bullet, and it may
> as well be sooner. (I can hardly believe that this is the worst
> compatibility issue an ex-Informix user would face, anyhow.)
>
> This is an Informix-ism. It should stay that way.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-02-20 04:19:36 Re: request for sql3 compliance for the update command
Previous Message Hiroshi Inoue 2003-02-20 03:58:34 A bad behavior under autocommit off mode