From: | Dennis <dennis(dot)verbeek(at)victorem(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Uniform UPDATE queries |
Date: | 2012-04-19 10:55:41 |
Message-ID: | 4F8FEF2D.6050501@victorem.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Hello Tom,
The example you have given is EXACTLY why something like CURRENT is needed to limit the number of
unique queries or prepared statements. (or to do a selection of all values before an update meaning
two executed queries.)
regards,.
Dennis
On 04/18/2012 06:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dennis<dennis(dot)verbeek(at)victorem(dot)com> writes:
>> When a query is written to update a table, the usual process is to list all the columns that need
>> updating. This could imply the creation of many possible queries for many columns. In an effort to
>> keep the UPDATE queries more uniform, less number of unique queries, a keyword similar to DEFAULT,
>> let's say CURRENT, is required to indicate that the current value must not change.
> No it isn't. Just write the name of the column, eg
>
> update mytable set x = x, y =<new value>, z = z where ...
>
> There's no reason to invent nonstandard syntax for this.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | thomas veymont | 2012-04-19 11:56:16 | Re: plpgsql : adding record variable to table |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2012-04-19 10:08:18 | Re: plpgsql : adding record variable to table |