Re: Insert vs Update syntax

[Brent Friedman <bfriedman(at)scanonline(dot)com>]

If you don't like the standard sql implementation, you could use plsql 
or any language to make an abstraction layer/wrapper for this 
functionality.  Just pass everything as a key/value pair, in an array or 
hashtable structure, to your abstraction layer/wrapper, and it can cycle 
through the data structure to do the insert or update for you.

In very rough psuedo-code, something like

   create my_data_structure {
          table = employees,
          first_name = sally,
          last_name = smith,
          date_of_birth = 2008-01-01
   }

   call function mywrapper (my_data_structure)

         .....
         function cycles through array, and creates an sql string 
dynamically

This may have problems with constraints, foreign keys, etc.
  

Clodoaldo wrote:
> 2008/2/29, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>:
>   
> > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 01:17:20PM -0300, Clodoaldo wrote:
> >  > When inserting into a table and there are many columns to be inserted
> >  > it is hard to synchronize columns to values:
> >
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >
> >  > Is there some reason for the insert syntax to be the way it is in
> >  > instead of the much easier to get it right Update syntax?:
> >
> >
> > Because it's what the SQL standard says. If you don't like it I suggest
> >  you take it up with them... But it's a little late to change now I
> >  think.
> >     
>
> I know about the standards and I'm not blaming postgresql. I just want
> to know if it is worth to bring the the matter to some responsible
> group.
>
> Regards, Clodoaldo Pinto Neto
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>
>