Re: Efficient DELETE Strategies
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Efficient DELETE Strategies |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8806.1023743276@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Efficient DELETE Strategies (Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>) |
Ответы |
Re: Efficient DELETE Strategies
Re: [HACKERS] Efficient DELETE Strategies |
Список | pgsql-sql |
Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at> writes: >> If so, what's their syntax? > MSSQL seems to guess what the user wants. Gack. Nothing like treating mindless syntax variations as a "feature" list... > All the following statements do the same: > (1) DELETE t1 FROM t2 WHERE t1.i=t2.i > (2a) DELETE t1 FROM t2, t1 WHERE t1.i=t2.i > (5) DELETE t1 FROM t1 a > WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM t2 WHERE a.i=t2.i) > (6) DELETE a FROM t1 a WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM t2 WHERE a.i=t2.i) So in other words, MSSQL has no idea whether the name following DELETE is a real table name or an alias, and it's also unclear whether the name appears in the separate FROM clause or generates a FROM-item all by itself. This is why they have to punt on these cases: > These don't work: > DELETE t1 FROM t1 b WHERE 2 * b.i = t1.i > "The column prefix 't1' does not match with a table name or alias name > used in the query." > DELETE t1 FROM t1 a, t1 b WHERE 2 * b.i = a.i > "The table 't1' is ambiguous." The ambiguity is entirely self-inflicted... > And as if there aren't enough ways yet, I just discovered that (1) to > (6) just as much work with "DELETE FROM" where I wrote "DELETE" ... Hm. So (1) with the DELETE FROM corresponds exactly to what I was suggesting:DELETE FROM t1 FROM t2 WHERE t1.i=t2.i except that I'd also allow an alias in there:DELETE FROM t1 a FROM t2 b WHERE a.i=b.i Given the plethora of mutually incompatible interpretations that MSSQL evidently supports, though, I fear we can't use it as precedent for making any choices :-(. Can anyone check out other systems? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-sql по дате отправления: