Re: row constructors

From: Rory Campbell-Lange <rory(at)campbell-lange(dot)net>
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Sim Zacks <sim(at)compulab(dot)co(dot)il>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: row constructors
Date: 2009-02-12 16:38:33
Message-ID: 20090212163833.GC14801@campbell-lange.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 12/02/09, Merlin Moncure (mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Sim Zacks <sim(at)compulab(dot)co(dot)il> wrote:
> > Never mind. I found an old post.
> > I just needed to do:
> > insert into a1 select (f2).* from a2;
> >
> > I didn't find it the first time I searched because I was looking for row
> > constructors, and the post I found used the term composite value.
>
> I'm scheming to get that fixed. The main reason is that while the
> insert workaround works, there is no similar workaround for 'update'.

Do you mean that the currently unsupported behaviour

UPDATE accounts SET (contact_last_name, contact_first_name) =
(SELECT last_name, first_name FROM salesmen
WHERE salesmen.id = accounts.sales_id);

will be fixed? (with reference to http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/sql-update.html#AEN61082)

Rory

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Crawford 2009-02-12 17:02:12 Re: Killing OIDs
Previous Message Rory Campbell-Lange 2009-02-12 16:32:18 Re: Update table with random values from another table