X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FF165333D for ; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 00:51:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 48697-02 for ; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 03:51:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from megazone.bigpanda.com (megazone.bigpanda.com [64.147.171.210]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B53753339 for ; Sat, 30 Apr 2005 00:51:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id DC67D350D5; Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:51:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by megazone.bigpanda.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAE0E35099; Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:51:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:51:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Stephan Szabo To: Michael M Friedel Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Question about update syntaxt In-Reply-To: <5BD9C777-3A63-4A00-8B4B-F1BB5C230893@betty-tv.com> Message-ID: <20050429203821.L60676@megazone.bigpanda.com> References: <5BD9C777-3A63-4A00-8B4B-F1BB5C230893@betty-tv.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.008 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200504/414 X-Sequence-Number: 21307 On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, Michael M Friedel wrote: > I am trying to use an application (Through ODBC) that uses the > following update syntax > > UPDATE MyTable SET MyTable.id=2 WHERE id=1 > > unfortunatly I get an error message > > ERROR: column "mytable" of relation "mytable" does not exist > > Question is, is ther something I can configure that will make > Postgresql accept these kind of statments ? I don't believe there's a way to make the server itself accept that. IIRC, past discussions usually have bogged down into questions of whether to support the syntax since it doesn't appear to be valid SQL and if so what semantics to give cases where the tablename doesn't match. I'm not sure if there's any way to get the ODBC driver to do something about it, however.