Added to TODO:
* Allow DELETE to handle table aliases for self-joins [delete]
---
Manfred Koizar wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jun 2002 09:56:27 -0400, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >Does anyone know whether other
On Tue, 2002-06-11 at 04:53, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Hannu Krosing wrote:
> > >> What about
> > >>
> > >> DELETE relation_expr FROM relation_expr [ , table_ref [ , ... ] ]
> > >> [ WHERE bool_expr ]
> > >>
> > >> or
> > >>
> > >
> 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?
MySQL:
6.4.6 DELETE Syntax
DELETE [LOW_PRIORITY | QUICK] FROM table_name
[WHERE
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Hannu Krosing wrote:
> >> What about
> >>
> >> DELETE relation_expr FROM relation_expr [ , table_ref [ , ... ] ]
> >> [ WHERE bool_expr ]
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> DELETE relation_expr.* FROM relation_expr [ , table_ref [ , ... ] ]
>
This
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> DELETE relation_expr FROM relation_expr [ , table_ref [ , ... ] ]
> [ WHERE bool_expr ]
This in some ways is similar to Oracle where the FROM is optional in a
DELETE (ie. DELETE foo WHERE ...). By omitting the first FROM, the
syntax ends up mirroring the UPD
> -Original Message-
> From: Josh Berkus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, June 10, 2002 3:42 PM
> To: Tom Lane; Manfred Koizar
> Cc: Christoph Haller; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [SQL] Efficient DELETE Strategies
>
Tom,
> >> 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...
I vote that we stick to a strick SQL92 interpretation, here.
1) It's standard
2) Strict syntax on DELETE statements is
Manfred Koizar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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) DELET
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hannu Krosing wrote:
>> What about
>>
>> DELETE relation_expr FROM relation_expr [ , table_ref [ , ... ] ]
>> [ WHERE bool_expr ]
>>
>> or
>>
>> DELETE relation_expr.* FROM relation_expr [ , table_ref [ , ... ] ]
>> [ WHERE bool_expr ]
> So make the
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002 09:56:27 -0400, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Does anyone know whether other systems that support the UPDATE extension
>for multiple tables also support a DELETE extension for multiple tables?
>If so, what's their syntax?
MSSQL seems to guess what the user wants. All t
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> What about
>
> DELETE relation_expr FROM relation_expr [ , table_ref [ , ... ] ]
> [ WHERE bool_expr ]
>
> or
>
> DELETE relation_expr.* FROM relation_expr [ , table_ref [ , ... ] ]
> [ WHERE bool_expr ]
So make the initial FROM optional and allow the later F
Tom Lane wrote:
> Christoph Haller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> DELETE FROM relation_expr [ FROM table_ref [ , ... ] ]
> [ WHERE bool_expr ]
>
> The two FROMs in the second form look a little weird, but they help to
> make a clear separation between the deletion target table and t
On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 15:56, Tom Lane wrote:
> Christoph Haller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Based on an entry in the mailing list from 30 Oct 2001
> > about efficient deletes on subqueries,
> > I've found two ways to do so (PostgreSQL 7.2.1):
> > ...
> > Is there a way to put the second for
Christoph Haller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Based on an entry in the mailing list from 30 Oct 2001
> about efficient deletes on subqueries,
> I've found two ways to do so (PostgreSQL 7.2.1):
> ...
> Is there a way to put the second form (more complicated, but faster)
> in one statement?
>
14 matches
Mail list logo
