![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
Could someone tell where I can find out if it's true that during UPDFATE SQL Serve deletes data from table, and then inserts new one. Thanks -A |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
The ANSI model of an UPDATE is that it acts as if |
|
1) You go to the base table. It cannot have an alias because an alias would create a working table that would be updated and then disappear after the statement is finished, thus doing nothing. 2) You go to the WHERE clause. All rows (if any!) that test TRUE are marked as a subset. If there is no WHERE clause, then the entire table is marked. The name of this set/pseudo-table is OLD in Standard SQL. 3) You go to the SET clause and construct a set/pseudo-table called NEW. The rows in this table are build by copying values from the columns are not mentioned from the original row to the NEW row. The columns are assigned all at once. That is, the unit of work is a row, not one column at a time. 4) The OLD subset is deleted and the NEW set is inserted. Those are the proprietary terms used in SQL Server, too. This is why UPDATE Foobar SET a = b, b = a; Swaps the values in the columns a and b. The engine checks constraints and does a ROLLBACK if there are violations. In full SQL-92, you can use row constructors to say things like: UPDATE Foobar SET (a, b) = (SELECT x, y FROM Floob AS F1 WHERE F1.keycol= Foobar.keycol); The proprietary, non-standard UPDATE.. FROM.. syntax is a total disaster in the ANSI model and in implementation, but that is another rant. Trying to UPDATE the temporary result of a JOIN syntax would be useless - that temporary result disappears at the end of the statement and never touches the base tables. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |