| From: | Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Ken Smith <ken(at)turbolinux(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: MySQL/PostgreSQL discrepancy |
| Date: | 2000-10-28 05:48:59 |
| Message-ID: | 3.0.5.32.20001028154859.025fe3a0@mail.rhyme.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
At 15:28 27/10/00 +0900, Ken Smith wrote:
>
>Which behavior is the correct?
>
To quote from the stanard:
"Each <update source> is effectively evaluated for the current
row before any of the current row's object rows is updated"
So I'd say MySQL is wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Lockhart | 2000-10-28 06:48:20 | Re: PL/pgSQL functions: NULL parameter trouble |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-10-28 04:39:53 | Re: MySQL/PostgreSQL discrepancy |