rma@acd4.acd.com ( R Matthew Adams ) (07/21/90)
In my job I use ORACLE 6.0.26.9.1, and I recently came across what I
believe to be an error in the SQL Language Reference Manual provided by
ORACLE (version 6.0).
The one of the syntax diagrams for an UPDATE statement that is
embedded in PRO*C code shows:
EXEC SQL [AT dbname] [FOR :host_integer]
UPDATE table
SET column1 = { (value) | query }
[, SET column2 = { (value) | query } ...
[ WHERE {search_condition|CURRENT OF cursor_name}]
If the 'SET' directly in front of column2 is left in as specified,
an error always occured. If left out, the query was successful.
Has anyone else ever seen this problem before? Was it corrected in a
later version? Am I just missing something painfully obvious again?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
R. Mattew Adams | rma@acd4 OR adamsr@rosevc.rose-hulman.edu
"What, me worry" - Alfred E. Newman
__________________________________________________________________________fifi@cosmo.UUCP (A.F.Zinser) (07/22/90)
In article <> rma@acd4.acd.com ( R Matthew Adams ) writes:
]
] [about the UPDATE-statement-syntax in Oracle Embedded SQL]
]
] If the 'SET' directly in front of column2 is left in as specified,
] an error always occured. If left out, the query was successful.
]
] Has anyone else ever seen this problem before? Was it corrected in a
] later version? Am I just missing something painfully obvious again?
No, you're right. I had seen this problem too while using Oracle V6.0.26
and tested it with Oracle V6.0.27 after upgrading: same effect. I assume,
there is a simple typing error in the SQL Language Reference Manual (take
a look on the wrong indent of the fourth line :-). In the Pro*C Users Guide
the Statement is described correctly (Example #5, Page 41).
--
Please Reply-To: fifi%veeble@mcshh.hanse.de || ..!mcsun!unido!mcshh!veeble!fifi
Axel Zinser VOICE: +49 511 699945
fifi%veeble@mcshh.hanse.de | fifi@cosmo.uucp | fifi@mcshh.hanse.de
...uunet!mcsun!unido!{cosmo!|mcshh![veeble!]}fifi