Re: Query failing with strange error.
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Query failing with strange error. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5018.1042645552@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Query failing with strange error. (David Gilbert <dgilbert@velocet.ca>) |
Список | pgsql-admin |
David Gilbert <dgilbert@velocet.ca> writes: > update customer_contact > set next_billed=min(customer_services.eff_date) > where customer_contact.conn_num=7698 > and customer_services.conn_num=7698 > and customer_services.inv_num=0 This is not a well-defined query --- exactly what do you think the semantics should be? Over what set of rows is the MIN() taken, for any particular target row to be updated? With only one WHERE clause, you've got no way to control the set of rows the MIN() scans separately from the set of rows the UPDATE targets. SQL92 forbids such things outright: <update statement: searched> ::= UPDATE <table name> SET <set clause list> [ WHERE <search condition> ] Syntax Rules 2) A <value expression> in a <set clause> shall not directly con- tain a <set function specification>. Postgres doesn't presently forbid it, but we probably should, because the executor tends to get confused --- unsurprisingly considering that there's no well-defined behavior for this case. What I think you mean is update customer_contact set next_billed = (SELECT min(customer_services.eff_date) FROM customer_services where customer_services.conn_num=7698 and customer_services.inv_num=0) where conn_num=7698 but that's just a guess about the intended behavior. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-admin по дате отправления: