Posted by Erland Sommarskog on 10/06/80 11:31

Peter Yu (yuyuante@ms3.hinet.net) writes:
> It works fine. But I don't understand why you said *the
> US99000D is not match against the instance in the derived table* ?

The UPDATE FROM syntax is proprietary for MS SQL Server and Sybase. It
works well most of the time, but there are some funny tweaks when you
leave the main row. I recommend that you always include the target table
as the first table in the FROM clause to avoid accidents like this. What
happened now was that you probably got a cartesian product between the
target table and the tables in the FROM clause.


--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se

Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/productdoc/2000/books.asp

• Next in forum: Insert
• Prev in forum: Re: update spends 1800 times more than select
• Thread view: Re: update spends 1800 times more than select

[Reply to this message]