Bruce Momjian wrote:
Susanne Ebrecht wrote:
Is it too hard to rip it back out once the full row support
arrives?  That seems speculation at best anyway.
That's what I was thinking.  Glad someone else replied.  ;-)
If you're looking for votes, +1. I'll gladly take a subset of the
SQL standard UPDATE table SET (...) = (...) over having nothing.
+1 here, too. :)

I am working now to get this into 8.2.

I am glad to read this. But what does it mean to me? Shall I change the patch someway?

I have merged your patch into current CVS and applied it; attached. There was quite a bit of code drift. One drift area was the new
RETURNING clause;  that was easy to fix.  A more complex case is the
code no longer has values as ResTargets --- it is a simple a_expr list,
so I changed the critical assignment in gram.y from:

        res_col->val = (Node *)copyObject(res_val->val);


        res_col->val = (Node *)copyObject(res_val);

Hope that is OK.  Without that fix, it crashed.  I also merged your SGML
syntax and grammer addition into the exiting UPDATE main entry.
Of course it is ok. Many thanks.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
      choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not

Reply via email to