"John D. Burger" <john@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I sometimes have trouble understanding the edicts of the wise ones - > anyone know what the rationale for this is? I'm not sure whether the SQL spec authors foresaw this (or maybe even have added it themselves in SQL2003), but the main reason why not allow table-qualification of INSERT and UPDATE targets is that qualification in this context should mean sub-fields of composite-type columns. We do support the latter, since 8.0 I think. If we tried to support both we'd have ambiguity problems. regards, tom lane
