On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Rory Campbell-Lange <rory@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 12/02/09, Merlin Moncure (mmoncure@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Sim Zacks <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Never mind. I found an old post. >> > I just needed to do: >> > insert into a1 select (f2).* from a2; >> > >> > I didn't find it the first time I searched because I was looking for row >> > constructors, and the post I found used the term composite value. >> >> I'm scheming to get that fixed. The main reason is that while the >> insert workaround works, there is no similar workaround for 'update'. > > Do you mean that the currently unsupported behaviour > > UPDATE accounts SET (contact_last_name, contact_first_name) = > (SELECT last_name, first_name FROM salesmen > WHERE salesmen.id = accounts.sales_id); no, but that would also be nice. I mean, update account set account = (123, 'a', 1)::account where account_id = 123; merlin -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
