Re: Update using sub-select table in schema

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Chris Dunlop <chris(at)onthe(dot)net(dot)au>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Update using sub-select table in schema
Date: 2006-10-02 17:35:31
Message-ID: 12871.1159810531@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

I wrote:
> The comments for refnameRangeTblEntry indicate that at one time we
> thought we saw support for our approach in the spec:

Here is the discussion thread that settled on our current behavior:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2002-03/msg00403.php
It looks like we followed Oracle.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2006-10-02 20:14:25 Re: BUG #2666: how do cluster with 7.4.13 ?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-10-02 17:23:16 Re: Update using sub-select table in schema

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message uwcssa 2006-10-02 17:37:21 undescribe
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-10-02 17:23:16 Re: Update using sub-select table in schema