>> Kjell Rilbe wrote:
>> > Now, as far as I know FB doesn't support this update ... from syntax,
>> > but is there any other way that FB could end up mixing data from
>> > multiple records in this subtle way instead of throwing an exception?
>> >
>> > Kjell
>> >
>>
>> Since you will need a sub-query like
>>
>> update
>> M
>> set
>> M.FieldA = (select FieldA from D where ...),
>> M.FieldB = (select FieldB from D where ...)
>>
>> you would get "multiple records" error, this kind of update requires a
>> single row returned
>>
>> So I don't think you could get such mixing with FB.
>
> Thank you - I knew about that syntax for FB. Just wondered if there are
> other ways to do it or if FB has other constructs that could suffer
> similar mixing as SQL Server.
>
> Somehow it seems typical of a Microsoft product to do strange unexpected
> things without telling anyone... And I though other FB enthusiasts like
> me might find this example amusing. :-)

Another amusing example is how MSSQL handles UNIQUE consraints with
NULLable fields compared to all others. ;-))


--
Best Regards,
Thomas Steinmaurer
LogManager Series - Logging/Auditing Suites supporting
InterBase, Firebird, Advantage Database, MS SQL Server and
NexusDB V2
Upscene Productions
http://www.upscene.com
My blog:
http://blog.upscene.com/thomas/