From: | Vince Vielhaber <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: insert statements |
Date: | 2002-03-14 02:25:39 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.40.0203132115280.99604-100000@paprika.michvhf.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Vince Vielhaber writes:
>
> > For example:
> >
> > insert into foo(foo.a) values(1);
> >
> > fails because the table name is used. Update statements also include the
> > table name. Both fail. Does anyone know of a workaround?
>
> Completely loudly to whomever wrote that SQL. It's completely
> non-standard.
>
> (The implication I'm trying to make is that there's no way to make
> PostgreSQL accept that statement. Adding this as an extension has been
> rejected in the past.)
Yeah, that's kinda what I expected. There's just under 1700 insert and
update statements but only 1200 selects. Neither option sounds good at
this point.
Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH email: vev(at)michvhf(dot)com http://www.pop4.net
56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
Online Campground Directory http://www.camping-usa.com
Online Giftshop Superstore http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-03-14 02:48:09 | GIST |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-03-14 02:14:25 | Re: insert statements |