| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Keith Parks <emkxp01(at)mtcc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, geek+(at)cmu(dot)edu |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Table aliases in delete statements? |
| Date: | 1999-12-09 03:20:14 |
| Message-ID: | 199912090320.WAA03916@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> >Unless your query is going to be long enough to run into query length
> >limits, aliases are not your friends. Standard SQL they may be, but
> >aliases always end up obscuring queries to those who come along after
> >you.
>
> The problem is that it's difficult to refer to the same table twice
> in a single query without using aliases.
>
> The trap I fell into was thinking I had to alias both references to
> the table.
>
> I'd be interested in seeing alternative solutions to the duplicate
> removal problem.
Yes, that is tricky in that there is an aliased version and a non-alias
version of the same table.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 1999-12-09 03:57:00 | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel regress tests (was Re: FOREIGN KEY andshift/reduce) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-12-09 03:03:00 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: [BUGS] uniqueness not always correct |