| From: | "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane *EXTERN*" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Kevin Hunter" <hunteke(at)earlham(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | "Ron Johnson" <ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net>, "Postgres General List" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SQL spec/implementation question: UPDATE |
| Date: | 2007-10-22 07:07:23 |
| Message-ID: | D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C2647758@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't have handy a spec guide. Does this mean that MySQL
>> is indeed showing incorrect behavior?
>
> I think this is really outside the spec.
[...]
> There is not anything I can see addressing whether an
> "update" should or should not be considered to occur if a
> target column happens to not change as a result of a
> commanded update.
Moreover, I can think of one argument why an UPDATE that
does not change the value of the row should still occur:
There may be an ON UPDATE trigger on the table that you
expect to fire whether or not the UPDATE was "optimized
away".
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Huxton | 2007-10-22 08:12:45 | Re: Out of memory with ODBC |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-22 06:24:25 | Re: SQL spec/implementation question: UPDATE |