On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Ken Kixmoeller (ProFox) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Update the_table set field_A = field_B, field_C = field_D where > field_a = 0 > > -- The intended result was fine, but there was an unintended > additional result: field_F was set to 14 in all of the affected > records.
Funny fieldnames you have. Is field_F a timestamp, and the first timestamp field in the record? You can't reproduce this with a simple example using the data you've supplied, so there are other clues we cannot guess. How about showing us the real table structure and the real commands you used? -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
