mirror of https://github.com/postgres/postgres
Add delete selfjoin item.
This commit is contained in:
Bruce Momjian
parent
89f4f4a8e5
commit
566cde8cdc
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,847 @@
|
||||||
|
From pgsql-sql-owner+M8069=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Mon Jun 10 07:42:52 2002
|
||||||
|
Return-path: <pgsql-sql-owner+M8069=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g5ABgps29742
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 07:42:52 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id E946447607D
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 07:42:47 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4AB30475F59
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 07:42:41 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BBB64758F7
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 07:42:30 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from fzkmail2.fzk.de (fzkmail2.fzk.de [141.52.27.52])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 39027475473
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 07:42:28 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: FROM resy5.fzk.de BY fzkmail2.fzk.de ; Mon Jun 10 13:42:29 2002 +0200
|
||||||
|
Received: by rodos.fzk.de with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.7.1) id NAA01104 for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 13:42:49 +0200 (METDST)
|
||||||
|
From: Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>
|
||||||
|
Message-ID: <200206101142.NAA16854@rodos>
|
||||||
|
Subject: [SQL] Efficient DELETE Strategies
|
||||||
|
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 13:42:10 METDST
|
||||||
|
X-Mailer: Elm [revision: 212.4]
|
||||||
|
Precedence: bulk
|
||||||
|
Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Status: OR
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Hi,
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
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):
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
1.
|
||||||
|
BEGIN ;
|
||||||
|
EXPLAIN ANALYZE
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM onfvalue WHERE EXISTS(
|
||||||
|
SELECT * FROM onfvalue j WHERE
|
||||||
|
j.sid= 5 AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.lid = j.lid AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.mid = j.mid AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.timepoint = j.timepoint AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.entrancetime < j.entrancetime
|
||||||
|
) ;
|
||||||
|
ROLLBACK ;
|
||||||
|
QUERY PLAN:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Seq Scan on onfvalue
|
||||||
|
(cost=0.00..805528.05 rows=66669 width=6)
|
||||||
|
(actual time=61.84..25361.82 rows=24 loops=1)
|
||||||
|
SubPlan
|
||||||
|
-> Index Scan using advncd_onfvalue_idx_stlme on onfvalue j
|
||||||
|
(cost=0.00..6.02 rows=1 width=36)
|
||||||
|
(actual time=0.14..0.14 rows=0 loops=133338)
|
||||||
|
Total runtime: 25364.76 msec
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
2.
|
||||||
|
BEGIN ;
|
||||||
|
EXPLAIN ANALYZE
|
||||||
|
INSERT INTO temprefentrancetime(timepoint,lid,mid,sid,entrancetime)
|
||||||
|
SELECT o.timepoint,o.lid,o.mid,o.sid,o.entrancetime
|
||||||
|
FROM onfvalue o join onfvalue j ON (
|
||||||
|
o.lid = j.lid AND
|
||||||
|
o.mid = j.mid AND
|
||||||
|
o.timepoint = j.timepoint AND
|
||||||
|
o.entrancetime < j.entrancetime
|
||||||
|
) WHERE o.sid= 5 ;
|
||||||
|
EXPLAIN ANALYZE
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM onfvalue WHERE
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.timepoint = temprefentrancetime.timepoint AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.mid = temprefentrancetime.mid AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.lid = temprefentrancetime.lid AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.sid = temprefentrancetime.sid AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.entrancetime = temprefentrancetime.entrancetime ;
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM temprefentrancetime;
|
||||||
|
ROLLBACK ;
|
||||||
|
QUERY PLAN:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Merge Join
|
||||||
|
(cost=16083.12..16418.36 rows=4 width=52)
|
||||||
|
(actual time=17728.06..19325.02 rows=24 loops=1)
|
||||||
|
-> Sort
|
||||||
|
(cost=2152.53..2152.53 rows=667 width=28)
|
||||||
|
(actual time=1937.70..2066.46 rows=16850 loops=1)
|
||||||
|
-> Index Scan using advncd_onfvalue_idx_stlme on onfvalue o
|
||||||
|
(cost=0.00..2121.26 rows=667 width=28)
|
||||||
|
(actual time=0.57..709.89 rows=16850 loops=1)
|
||||||
|
-> Sort
|
||||||
|
(cost=13930.60..13930.60 rows=133338 width=24)
|
||||||
|
(actual time=13986.07..14997.43 rows=133110 loops=1)
|
||||||
|
-> Seq Scan on onfvalue j
|
||||||
|
(cost=0.00..2580.38 rows=133338 width=24)
|
||||||
|
(actual time=0.15..3301.06 rows=133338 loops=1)
|
||||||
|
Total runtime: 19487.49 msec
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
QUERY PLAN:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Nested Loop
|
||||||
|
(cost=0.00..6064.40 rows=1 width=62)
|
||||||
|
(actual time=1.34..8.32 rows=24 loops=1)
|
||||||
|
-> Seq Scan on temprefentrancetime
|
||||||
|
(cost=0.00..20.00 rows=1000 width=28)
|
||||||
|
(actual time=0.44..1.07 rows=24 loops=1)
|
||||||
|
-> Index Scan using advncd_onfvalue_idx_stlme on onfvalue
|
||||||
|
(cost=0.00..6.02 rows=1 width=34)
|
||||||
|
(actual time=0.22..0.25 rows=1 loops=24)
|
||||||
|
Total runtime: 10.15 msec
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The questions are:
|
||||||
|
Is there a way to put the second form (more complicated, but faster)
|
||||||
|
in one statement?
|
||||||
|
Or is there even a third way to delete, which I cannot see?
|
||||||
|
Regards, Christoph
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||||||
|
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
|
||||||
|
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
|
||||||
|
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
From pgsql-sql-owner+M8075=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Mon Jun 10 12:03:46 2002
|
||||||
|
Return-path: <pgsql-sql-owner+M8075=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g5AG3js15254
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 12:03:45 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28808476B25
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 12:00:33 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 69ECC476DAA
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 11:21:32 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP
|
||||||
|
id 4A69E4760C0; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 11:21:22 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
|
||||||
|
id EBA4C475B88; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 09:56:50 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
|
||||||
|
by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g5ADuSb05622;
|
||||||
|
Mon, 10 Jun 2002 09:56:28 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
To: Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>
|
||||||
|
cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Subject: Re: [SQL] Efficient DELETE Strategies
|
||||||
|
In-Reply-To: <200206101142.NAA16854@rodos>
|
||||||
|
References: <200206101142.NAA16854@rodos>
|
||||||
|
Comments: In-reply-to Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>
|
||||||
|
message dated "Mon, 10 Jun 2002 13:42:10 +0700"
|
||||||
|
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 09:56:27 -0400
|
||||||
|
Message-ID: <5619.1023717387@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
Precedence: bulk
|
||||||
|
Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Status: ORr
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de> 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?
|
||||||
|
> Or is there even a third way to delete, which I cannot see?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The clean way to do this would be to allow extra FROM-list relations
|
||||||
|
in DELETE. We already have a similar facility for UPDATE, so it's not
|
||||||
|
clear to me why there's not one for DELETE. Then you could do, say,
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM onfvalue , onfvalue j WHERE
|
||||||
|
j.sid= 5 AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.lid = j.lid AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.mid = j.mid AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.timepoint = j.timepoint AND
|
||||||
|
onfvalue.entrancetime < j.entrancetime ;
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
If you were using two separate tables you could force this to happen
|
||||||
|
via an implicit FROM-clause entry, much as you've done in your second
|
||||||
|
alternative --- but there's no way to set up a self-join in a DELETE
|
||||||
|
because of the lack of any place to put an alias declaration.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
AFAIK this extension would be utterly trivial to implement, since all
|
||||||
|
the machinery is there already --- for 99% of the backend, it doesn't
|
||||||
|
matter whether a FROM-item is implicit or explicit. We'd only need to
|
||||||
|
argue out what the syntax should be. I could imagine
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM relation_expr [ , table_ref [ , ... ] ]
|
||||||
|
[ WHERE bool_expr ]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
or
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
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 the
|
||||||
|
merely-referenced tables. Also, the first one might look to people
|
||||||
|
like they'd be allowed to write
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM foo FULL JOIN bar ...
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
which is not any part of my intention (it's very unclear what it'd
|
||||||
|
mean for the target table to be on the nullable side of an outer join).
|
||||||
|
OTOH there'd be no harm in outer joins in a separate from-clause, eg
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM foo FROM (bar FULL JOIN baz ON ...) WHERE ...
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Actually, either syntax above would support that; I guess what's really
|
||||||
|
bothering me about the first syntax is that a comma suggests a list of
|
||||||
|
things that will all be treated similarly, while in reality the first
|
||||||
|
item will be treated much differently from the rest.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
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?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
A somewhat-related issue is that people keep expecting to be able to
|
||||||
|
attach an alias to the target table name in UPDATE and DELETE; seems
|
||||||
|
like we get that question every couple months. While this is clearly
|
||||||
|
disallowed by the SQL spec, it's apparently supported by some other
|
||||||
|
implementations (else we'd not get the question so much). Should we
|
||||||
|
add that extension to our syntax? Or should we continue to resist it?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
regards, tom lane
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||||||
|
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
|
||||||
|
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
From pgsql-sql-owner+M8084=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Mon Jun 10 17:29:55 2002
|
||||||
|
Return-path: <pgsql-sql-owner+M8084=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g5ALTss19669
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:29:55 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E791476662
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:08:54 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 058BC47699E
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:54:17 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 166E8476126
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:54:07 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from email03.aon.at (WARSL402PIP6.highway.telekom.at [195.3.96.93])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5220F475EE3
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:24:10 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: (qmail 384444 invoked from network); 10 Jun 2002 20:24:10 -0000
|
||||||
|
Received: from m155p031.dipool.highway.telekom.at (HELO cantor) ([62.46.9.95]) (envelope-sender <mkoi-pg@aon.at>)
|
||||||
|
by qmail3rs.highway.telekom.at (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
|
||||||
|
for <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; 10 Jun 2002 20:24:10 -0000
|
||||||
|
From: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>
|
||||||
|
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
cc: Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org,
|
||||||
|
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Subject: Re: [SQL] Efficient DELETE Strategies
|
||||||
|
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 22:23:38 +0200
|
||||||
|
Message-ID: <j8u9gukf7882nq3tsfhqr5bte9386p637l@4ax.com>
|
||||||
|
References: <200206101142.NAA16854@rodos> <5619.1023717387@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
In-Reply-To: <5619.1023717387@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
|
||||||
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||||||
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
|
||||||
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
||||||
|
Precedence: bulk
|
||||||
|
Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Status: OR
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002 09:56:27 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
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 the following
|
||||||
|
statements do the same:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(0) DELETE FROM t1 WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM t2 WHERE t1.i=t2.i)
|
||||||
|
(1) DELETE t1 FROM t2 WHERE t1.i=t2.i
|
||||||
|
(2a) DELETE t1 FROM t2, t1 WHERE t1.i=t2.i
|
||||||
|
(2b) DELETE t1 FROM t2 INNER JOIN t1 ON t1.i=t2.i
|
||||||
|
(3a) DELETE t1 FROM t2, t1 a WHERE a.i=t2.i
|
||||||
|
(3b) DELETE t1 FROM t2 INNER JOIN t1 a ON a.i=t2.i
|
||||||
|
(4a) DELETE a FROM t2, t1 a WHERE a.i=t2.i
|
||||||
|
(4b) DELETE a FROM t2 INNER JOIN t1 a ON a.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)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(0) is standard SQL and should always work. As an extension I'd like
|
||||||
|
(1) or (2), but only one of them and forbid the other one. I'd also
|
||||||
|
forbid (3), don't know what to think of (4), and don't see a reason
|
||||||
|
why we would want (5) or (6). I'd rather have (7) or (8).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
These don't work:
|
||||||
|
(7) DELETE t1 a FROM t2 WHERE a.i = t2.i
|
||||||
|
"Incorrect syntax near 'a'."
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
(8) DELETE FROM t1 a WHERE EXISTS (SELECT * FROM t2 WHERE a.i = t2.i)
|
||||||
|
"Incorrect syntax near 'a'."
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Self joins:
|
||||||
|
(2as) DELETE t1 FROM t1, t1 b WHERE 2*b.i=t1.i
|
||||||
|
(4as) DELETE a FROM t1 a, t1 b WHERE 2*b.i=a.i
|
||||||
|
(4bs) DELETE a FROM t1 a INNER JOIN t1 b on 2*b.i=a.i
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
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."
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
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" ...
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Servus
|
||||||
|
Manfred
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||||||
|
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
|
||||||
|
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
From pgsql-sql-owner+M8087=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Mon Jun 10 18:21:01 2002
|
||||||
|
Return-path: <pgsql-sql-owner+M8087=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g5AML1s23486
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 18:21:01 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id E49B0475DF3
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 18:20:59 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 44380476B3C
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:52:32 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP
|
||||||
|
id C8FAA476313; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:52:22 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
|
||||||
|
id 3AE9A4769C6; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:09:25 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
|
||||||
|
by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g5AL7ub08809;
|
||||||
|
Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:07:56 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
To: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>
|
||||||
|
cc: Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org,
|
||||||
|
pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Subject: Re: [SQL] Efficient DELETE Strategies
|
||||||
|
In-Reply-To: <j8u9gukf7882nq3tsfhqr5bte9386p637l@4ax.com>
|
||||||
|
References: <200206101142.NAA16854@rodos> <5619.1023717387@sss.pgh.pa.us> <j8u9gukf7882nq3tsfhqr5bte9386p637l@4ax.com>
|
||||||
|
Comments: In-reply-to Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>
|
||||||
|
message dated "Mon, 10 Jun 2002 22:23:38 +0200"
|
||||||
|
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 17:07:56 -0400
|
||||||
|
Message-ID: <8806.1023743276@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
Precedence: bulk
|
||||||
|
Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Status: OR
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
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
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||||||
|
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
|
||||||
|
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
From pgsql-sql-owner+M8093=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Tue Jun 11 05:19:14 2002
|
||||||
|
Return-path: <pgsql-sql-owner+M8093=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g5B9JDs10695
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 05:19:13 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF0B2476367
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 05:19:10 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 396594762B3
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 05:19:06 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 196DE475EFD
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 05:18:57 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from fzkmail2.fzk.de (fzkmail2.fzk.de [141.52.27.52])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6A5EE475EA8
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 05:18:55 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: FROM resy5.fzk.de BY fzkmail2.fzk.de ; Tue Jun 11 11:18:56 2002 +0200
|
||||||
|
Received: by rodos.fzk.de with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.7.1) id LAA02189 for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:19:15 +0200 (METDST)
|
||||||
|
From: Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>
|
||||||
|
Message-ID: <200206110918.LAA20463@rodos>
|
||||||
|
Subject: Re: [SQL] Efficient DELETE Strategies
|
||||||
|
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:18:34 METDST
|
||||||
|
X-Mailer: Elm [revision: 212.4]
|
||||||
|
Precedence: bulk
|
||||||
|
Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Status: OR
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Bruce Momjian wrote:
|
||||||
|
> ...
|
||||||
|
> Yes, another keyword is the only solution. Having FROM after DELETE
|
||||||
|
> mean something different from FROM after a tablename is just too weird.
|
||||||
|
> I know UPDATE uses FROM, and it is logical to use it here, but it is
|
||||||
|
> just too wierd when DELETE already has a FROM. Should we allow FROM and
|
||||||
|
> add WITH to UPDATE as well, and document WITH but support FROM too? No
|
||||||
|
> idea. What if we support ADD FROM as the keywords for the new clause?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Sounds like the best solution so far.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
|
||||||
|
> DELETE [LOW_PRIORITY | QUICK] table_name[.*] [,table_name[.*] ...]
|
||||||
|
> FROM table-references
|
||||||
|
> [WHERE where_definition]
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> or
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> DELETE [LOW_PRIORITY | QUICK]
|
||||||
|
> FROM table_name[.*], [table_name[.*] ...]
|
||||||
|
> USING table-references
|
||||||
|
> [WHERE where_definition]
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> ...
|
||||||
|
> The idea is that only matching rows from the tables listed before the FROM
|
||||||
|
> or before the USING clause are deleted. The effect is that you can delete
|
||||||
|
> rows from many tables at the same time and also have additional tables that
|
||||||
|
> are used for searching.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Sounds tempting. It is much more what I was asking for.
|
||||||
|
Is there a collision with USING ( join_column_list ) ?
|
||||||
|
And it looks like very much work for the HACKERS.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Hannu Krosing wrote:
|
||||||
|
> ...
|
||||||
|
> Or then we can just stick with standard syntax and teach people to do
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> DELETE FROM t1 where t1.id1 in
|
||||||
|
> (select id2 from t2 where t2.id2 = t1.id1)
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> and perhaps even teach our optimizer to add the t2.id2 = t1.id1 part
|
||||||
|
> itself to make it fast
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> AFAIK this should be exactly the same as the proposed
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> DELETE FROM t1 FROM t2
|
||||||
|
> WHERE t2.id2 = t1.id1
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This is a fine idea. But it looks like very much work for the HACKERS, too.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Regards, Christoph
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||||||
|
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
From pgsql-sql-owner+M8094=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Tue Jun 11 10:29:20 2002
|
||||||
|
Return-path: <pgsql-sql-owner+M8094=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g5BETKs27634
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:29:20 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C77447648F
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:29:15 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DFEDD476412
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:29:08 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16FB8475905
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:28:59 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B568475864
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:28:58 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
|
||||||
|
by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g5BESfb18949;
|
||||||
|
Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:28:41 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
To: Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>
|
||||||
|
cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Subject: Re: [SQL] Efficient DELETE Strategies
|
||||||
|
In-Reply-To: <200206110918.LAA20463@rodos>
|
||||||
|
References: <200206110918.LAA20463@rodos>
|
||||||
|
Comments: In-reply-to Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>
|
||||||
|
message dated "Tue, 11 Jun 2002 11:18:34 +0700"
|
||||||
|
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:28:40 -0400
|
||||||
|
Message-ID: <18946.1023805720@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
Precedence: bulk
|
||||||
|
Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Status: OR
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de> writes:
|
||||||
|
> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
|
||||||
|
>> DELETE [LOW_PRIORITY | QUICK] table_name[.*] [,table_name[.*] ...]
|
||||||
|
>> FROM table-references
|
||||||
|
>> [WHERE where_definition]
|
||||||
|
>>
|
||||||
|
>> or
|
||||||
|
>>
|
||||||
|
>> DELETE [LOW_PRIORITY | QUICK]
|
||||||
|
>> FROM table_name[.*], [table_name[.*] ...]
|
||||||
|
>> USING table-references
|
||||||
|
>> [WHERE where_definition]
|
||||||
|
>>
|
||||||
|
>> The idea is that only matching rows from the tables listed before the FROM
|
||||||
|
>> or before the USING clause are deleted. The effect is that you can delete
|
||||||
|
>> rows from many tables at the same time and also have additional tables that
|
||||||
|
>> are used for searching.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
> Sounds tempting. It is much more what I was asking for.
|
||||||
|
> Is there a collision with USING ( join_column_list ) ?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Good point --- that was a very poor choice of keyword by the MySQL guys.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
I have absolutely no intention of getting into this "delete from
|
||||||
|
multiple tables" business --- I don't understand the semantics it should
|
||||||
|
have, and it would probably not be easy to do inside Postgres anyway.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
It would seem that
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
DELETE [ FROM ] relation_expr [ alias_clause ]
|
||||||
|
[ FROM from_list ] where_clause
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
is the syntax that would be most nearly compatible with MSSQL and MySQL.
|
||||||
|
Does Oracle have anything comparable?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
regards, tom lane
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||||||
|
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
|
||||||
|
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
|
||||||
|
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
From pgsql-sql-owner+M8112=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Wed Jun 12 10:04:47 2002
|
||||||
|
Return-path: <pgsql-sql-owner+M8112=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g5CE4ks22425
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:04:46 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 695DA4769F8
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:04:39 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3A9CD4768C1
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:04:31 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 433F447595A
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:04:20 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from email01.aon.at (WARSL402PIP3.highway.telekom.at [195.3.96.97])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D029747585D
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:04:18 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: (qmail 421750 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2002 14:04:17 -0000
|
||||||
|
Received: from m156p012.dipool.highway.telekom.at (HELO cantor) ([62.46.9.108]) (envelope-sender <mkoi-pg@aon.at>)
|
||||||
|
by qmail1rs.highway.telekom.at (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
|
||||||
|
for <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; 12 Jun 2002 14:04:17 -0000
|
||||||
|
From: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>
|
||||||
|
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
cc: Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Subject: Re: [SQL] Efficient DELETE Strategies
|
||||||
|
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 16:03:39 +0200
|
||||||
|
Message-ID: <es9eguk7ov9644qo4qd341ess8ip8o51ok@4ax.com>
|
||||||
|
References: <200206110918.LAA20463@rodos> <18946.1023805720@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
In-Reply-To: <18946.1023805720@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
|
||||||
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||||||
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
|
||||||
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
||||||
|
Precedence: bulk
|
||||||
|
Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Status: ORr
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 10:28:40 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
wrote:
|
||||||
|
>It would seem that
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
> DELETE [ FROM ] relation_expr [ alias_clause ]
|
||||||
|
> [ FROM from_list ] where_clause
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
>is the syntax that would be most nearly compatible with MSSQL and MySQL.
|
||||||
|
>Does Oracle have anything comparable?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Oracle basically supports (with slight variations between releases
|
||||||
|
7/8/9):
|
||||||
|
DELETE [FROM] { table
|
||||||
|
| view
|
||||||
|
| ( subquery )
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
[alias] [WHERE ...] [returning_clause]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Informix (March 1997, 9.1?):
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM { table
|
||||||
|
| ONLY ( table )
|
||||||
|
| view
|
||||||
|
| synonym
|
||||||
|
| collection_derived_table
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
WHERE condition
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
According to the "SQL Quick Syntax Guide" the WHERE clause is not
|
||||||
|
optional. Does anybody know, if this is a documentation bug?
|
||||||
|
"Guide to SQL, Syntax" (Feb 1998, v7.3, v8.2) says, the WHERE clause
|
||||||
|
is optional, as we'd expect.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Servus
|
||||||
|
Manfred
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||||||
|
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
|
||||||
|
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
|
||||||
|
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
From pgsql-sql-owner+M8113=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Wed Jun 12 10:53:12 2002
|
||||||
|
Return-path: <pgsql-sql-owner+M8113=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g5CErCs26287
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:53:12 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58E1B476B2F
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:53:08 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3A802476A3D
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:52:39 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id E86DF4765E1
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:52:30 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1582476891
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:50:07 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
|
||||||
|
by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g5CEnQb09666;
|
||||||
|
Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:49:26 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
To: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>
|
||||||
|
cc: Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Subject: Re: [SQL] Efficient DELETE Strategies
|
||||||
|
In-Reply-To: <es9eguk7ov9644qo4qd341ess8ip8o51ok@4ax.com>
|
||||||
|
References: <200206110918.LAA20463@rodos> <18946.1023805720@sss.pgh.pa.us> <es9eguk7ov9644qo4qd341ess8ip8o51ok@4ax.com>
|
||||||
|
Comments: In-reply-to Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>
|
||||||
|
message dated "Wed, 12 Jun 2002 16:03:39 +0200"
|
||||||
|
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:49:26 -0400
|
||||||
|
Message-ID: <9663.1023893366@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
Precedence: bulk
|
||||||
|
Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Status: OR
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at> writes:
|
||||||
|
> Oracle basically supports (with slight variations between releases
|
||||||
|
> 7/8/9):
|
||||||
|
> DELETE [FROM] { table
|
||||||
|
> | view
|
||||||
|
> | ( subquery )
|
||||||
|
> }
|
||||||
|
> [alias] [WHERE ...] [returning_clause]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Bizarre. How are you supposed to delete from a subquery?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
> According to the "SQL Quick Syntax Guide" the WHERE clause is not
|
||||||
|
> optional. Does anybody know, if this is a documentation bug?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Probably. SQL92 saith:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
<delete statement: searched> ::=
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM <table name>
|
||||||
|
[ WHERE <search condition> ]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
<delete statement: positioned> ::=
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM <table name>
|
||||||
|
WHERE CURRENT OF <cursor name>
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
so I could see where a sloppy reader might get confused...
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
regards, tom lane
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||||||
|
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
|
||||||
|
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
From pgsql-sql-owner+M8118=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Wed Jun 12 14:26:01 2002
|
||||||
|
Return-path: <pgsql-sql-owner+M8118=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id g5CIQ0s15072
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 14:26:00 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0386476C77
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 14:26:00 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E24DB476BCA
|
||||||
|
for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 14:16:52 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from localhost.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])
|
||||||
|
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id 003F047694A
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 14:16:32 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: from email04.aon.at (WARSL402PIP5.highway.telekom.at [195.3.96.79])
|
||||||
|
by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BCEAE476026
|
||||||
|
for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 14:06:51 -0400 (EDT)
|
||||||
|
Received: (qmail 25330 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2002 18:06:47 -0000
|
||||||
|
Received: from m157p003.dipool.highway.telekom.at (HELO cantor) ([62.46.9.131]) (envelope-sender <mkoi-pg@aon.at>)
|
||||||
|
by qmail5rs.highway.telekom.at (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
|
||||||
|
for <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; 12 Jun 2002 18:06:47 -0000
|
||||||
|
From: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at>
|
||||||
|
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
cc: Christoph Haller <ch@rodos.fzk.de>, pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Subject: Re: [SQL] Efficient DELETE Strategies
|
||||||
|
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 20:06:11 +0200
|
||||||
|
Message-ID: <dgqeguc0kf8ord0g37vo3hm6maqk649jak@4ax.com>
|
||||||
|
References: <200206110918.LAA20463@rodos> <18946.1023805720@sss.pgh.pa.us> <es9eguk7ov9644qo4qd341ess8ip8o51ok@4ax.com> <9663.1023893366@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
In-Reply-To: <9663.1023893366@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
|
||||||
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
||||||
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
|
||||||
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
||||||
|
Precedence: bulk
|
||||||
|
Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org
|
||||||
|
Status: OR
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002 10:49:26 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
|
||||||
|
wrote:
|
||||||
|
>Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at> writes:
|
||||||
|
>> Oracle basically supports (with slight variations between releases
|
||||||
|
>> 7/8/9):
|
||||||
|
>> DELETE [FROM] { table
|
||||||
|
>> | view
|
||||||
|
>> | ( subquery )
|
||||||
|
>> }
|
||||||
|
>> [alias] [WHERE ...] [returning_clause]
|
||||||
|
>
|
||||||
|
>Bizarre. How are you supposed to delete from a subquery?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Hey, don't blame *me* :-) The thought seems to be, if it is ok to
|
||||||
|
delete from a view, and a view is just a name for a query, why not
|
||||||
|
allow to delete from a query. Here is an example out of the reference
|
||||||
|
manual:
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM (select * from emp)
|
||||||
|
WHERE JOB = 'SALESMAN'
|
||||||
|
AND COMM < 100;
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
To be clear: I do *not* think, we need this in PostgreSQL. Otherwise
|
||||||
|
we'd also have to support delete from the result set of a function ;-)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
BTW, I did some more digging. The results are somewhat confusing.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
O7: no subquery
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
O8 v8.0: subquery allowed
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
O8i v8.1.5:
|
||||||
|
DELETE [ FROM ] table_expression_clause [ where_clause ]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
table_expression_clause ::=
|
||||||
|
{ schema . { table
|
||||||
|
| view
|
||||||
|
| snapshot
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
| ( subquery )
|
||||||
|
| table_collection_expression
|
||||||
|
} [ , ... ]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Note, the syntax diagram in the "Oracle8i SQL Reference" claims, that
|
||||||
|
table_expression_clause can contain more than one table, view, etc.
|
||||||
|
but this feature(?) is not mentioned in the text. Please, could
|
||||||
|
someone try this?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
O9i: only one table, view, ...
|
||||||
|
DELETE [hint] [FROM]
|
||||||
|
{ dml_table_expression_clause
|
||||||
|
| ONLY ( dml_table_expression_clause ) }
|
||||||
|
[t_alias] [where_clause] [returning_clause];
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
dml_table_expression_clause ::=
|
||||||
|
{ [schema .]
|
||||||
|
{ table
|
||||||
|
[ { PARTITION ( partition )
|
||||||
|
| SUBPARTITION ( subpartition ) }
|
||||||
|
| @ dblink
|
||||||
|
]
|
||||||
|
| { view | materialized view } [@ dblink]
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
| ( subquery [subquery_restriction_clause] )
|
||||||
|
| table_collection_expression
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
One more thing I found:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Informix XPS (Extended Parallel Server) v8.3 and later allows
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM { table | view | synonym }
|
||||||
|
[ { USING | FROM }
|
||||||
|
{ table | view | synonym | alias } [ , ... ] ]
|
||||||
|
[ WHERE condition ]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
which looks pretty much like your suggestion. Though the semantics
|
||||||
|
are a bit fuzzy. They require the target table to be listed after the
|
||||||
|
USING (or second FROM) keyword and give this example:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM lineitem
|
||||||
|
USING order o, lineitem l
|
||||||
|
WHERE o.qty < 1 AND o.order_num = l.order_num
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
But what would they do on
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
DELETE FROM lineitem
|
||||||
|
USING lineitem l1, lineitem l2
|
||||||
|
WHERE l1.item_num < l2.item_num
|
||||||
|
AND l1.order_num = l2.order_num
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Servus
|
||||||
|
Manfred
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
|
||||||
|
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue