Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> Euler Taveira de Oliveira wrote:
>> euler=# delete from t1 where t1.a = t3.x;
>> DELETE 1
>> euler=# 
>> 
>> I think we need at least a NOTICE here. Of course it could be extended
>> to UPDATE too.

> I can see an argument for having a NOTICE here. On the other hand, 
> add_missing_from will default to false in 8.1, ...

... but when it is TRUE, there should be a notice, same as there is in
SELECT.  UPDATE should produce such a notice too, IMHO.  Probably we
omitted the message originally because there was no way to avoid it
in a DELETE, but now there will be.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: DELETE ... USING at 2005-04-05 02:49:19 from Neil Conway

Responses

• Re: DELETE ... USING at 2005-04-05 04:11:53 from Neil Conway

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Greg Stark	Date: 2005-04-05 03:32:47
	Subject: Re: Notes on lock table spilling
Previous:	From: Neil Conway	Date: 2005-04-05 02:49:19
	Subject: Re: DELETE ... USING

pgsql-patches by date

Next:	From: Neil Conway	Date: 2005-04-05 04:11:53
	Subject: Re: DELETE ... USING
Previous:	From: Neil Conway	Date: 2005-04-05 02:49:19
	Subject: Re: DELETE ... USING