This sounds like an enhancement, not a bug per-se. SQL92 seems
to say the below about searched update statements. What
was the error you got from your first query? (I'd guess
a parser error at t1?)
<update statement: searched> ::=
UPDATE <table name>
SET <set clause list>
[ WHERE <search condition> ]
Stephan Szabo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> andrew brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) reports a bug with a severity of 3
> The lower the number the more severe it is.
>
> Short Description
> table aliases with updates
>
> Long Description
> It appears that table aliases cannot be used in update queries for the table we are
>updating.
>
> Sample Code
> This doesn't work:
>
> update table1 t1 set value1 = (select value1 from table2 t2 where t2.value2 =
>t1.value2)
>
> But this does:
>
> update table1 set value1 = (select value1 from table2 t2 where t2.value2 =
>table1.value2)
