Re: Supporting multiple column assignment in UPDATE (9.5 project)

On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>
> On 05/05/2014 11:20 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     How about:
>>     UPDATE foo SET (foo).* = (1,2,3);
>>
>>
>> It is looking little bit strange
>>
>> I like previous proposal UPDATE foo SET foo = (1,2,3);
>>
>
> What if the table has a field called foo? Won't it then be ambiguous?

See upthread: it prefers the field to the table if both are there
(exactly as SELECT does).

merlin