SQL update fields of one table from fields of anot

问题:

I have two tables:

A [ID, column1, column2, column3]
B [ID, column1, column2, column3, column4]

A will always be subset of B (meaning all columns of A are also in B).

I want to update a record with a specific ID in B with their data from A for all columns of A. This ID exists both in A and B.

Is there an UPDATE syntax or any other way to do that without specifying the column names, just saying "set all columns of A"?

I'm using PostgreSQL, so a specific non-standard command is also accepted (however, not preferred).

回答1:

You can use the non-standard FROM clause.

UPDATE b
SET column1 = a.column1,
  column2 = a.column2,
  column3 = a.column3
FROM a
WHERE a.id = b.id
AND b.id = 1

回答2:

_{The question is old but I felt the best answer hadn't been given, yet.}

Is there an UPDATE syntax ... without specifying the column names?

General solution with dynamic SQL

You don't need to know any column names except for some unique column(s) to join on (id in the example). Works reliably for any possible corner case I can think of.

This is specific to PostgreSQL. I am building dynamic code based on the the information_schema, in particular the table information_schema.columns, which is defined in ANSI SQL and most modern RDBMS (except for Oracle) support it. But a DO statement with PL/pgSQL code executing dynamic SQL is totally non-standard PostgreSQL syntax.

DO
$do$
BEGIN

EXECUTE (
SELECT
'UPDATE b
 SET   (' || string_agg(quote_ident(column_name), ',') || ')
     = (' || string_agg('a.' || quote_ident(column_name), ',') || ')
 FROM   a
 WHERE  b.id = 123
 AND    a.id = b.id'
FROM   information_schema.columns
WHERE  table_name   = 'a'       -- table name, case sensitive
AND    table_schema = 'public'  -- schema name, case sensitive
AND    column_name <> 'id'      -- all columns except id
);

END
$do$;

Assuming a matching column in b for every column in a, but not the other way round. b can have additional columns.

WHERE b.id = 123 is optional, to update only a selected row.

SQL Fiddle.

Related answers with more explanation:

• Dynamic UPDATE fails due to unwanted parenthesis around string in plpgsql
• Update multiple columns that start with a specific string

Partial solutions with plain SQL

With list of shared columns

You still need to know the list of column names that both tables share. With a syntax shortcut for updating multiple columns - shorter than what other answers suggested so far in any case.

UPDATE b
SET   (  column1,   column2,   column3)
    = (a.column1, a.column2, a.column3)
FROM   a
WHERE  b.id = 123    -- optional, to update only selected row
AND    a.id = b.id;

SQL Fiddle.

This syntax was introduced with Postgres 8.2 in Dec. 2006, long before the question was asked.
More details in the manual and this related answer on dba.SE:

• Bulk update of all columns

With list of columns in B

If all columns of A are defined NOT NULL (but not necessarily B),
and you know the column names of B (but not necessarily A).

UPDATE b
SET   (column1, column2, column3, column4)
    = (COALESCE(ab.column1, b.column1)
     , COALESCE(ab.column2, b.column2)
     , COALESCE(ab.column3, b.column3)
     , COALESCE(ab.column4, b.column4)
      )
FROM (
   SELECT *
   FROM   a
   NATURAL LEFT JOIN  b -- append missing columns
   WHERE  b.id IS NULL  -- only if anything actually changes
   AND    a.id = 123    -- optional, to update only selected row
   ) ab
WHERE b.id = ab.id;

The NATURAL LEFT JOIN joins a row from b where all columns of the same name hold same values. We don't need an update in this case (nothing changes) and can eliminate those rows early in the process (WHERE b.id IS NULL).
We still need to find a matching row, so b.id = ab.id in the outer query.

SQL Fiddle.

This is standard SQL except for the FROM clause.
It works no matter which of the columns are actually present in A, but the query cannot distinguish between actual NULL values and missing columns in A, so it is only reliable if all columns in A are defined NOT NULL.

There are multiple possible variations, depending on what you know about both tables.

回答3:

I have been working with IBM DB2 database for more then decade and now trying to learn PostgreSQL.

It works on PostgreSQL 9.3.4, but does not work on DB2 10.5:

UPDATE B SET
     COLUMN1 = A.COLUMN1,
     COLUMN2 = A.COLUMN2,
     COLUMN3 = A.COLUMN3
FROM A
WHERE A.ID = B.ID

Note: Main problem is FROM cause that is not supported in DB2 and also not in ANSI SQL.

It works on DB2 10.5, but does NOT work on PostgreSQL 9.3.4:

UPDATE B SET
    (COLUMN1, COLUMN2, COLUMN3) =
               (SELECT COLUMN1, COLUMN2, COLUMN3 FROM A WHERE ID = B.ID)

FINALLY! It works on both PostgreSQL 9.3.4 and DB2 10.5:

UPDATE B SET
     COLUMN1 = (SELECT COLUMN1 FROM A WHERE ID = B.ID),
     COLUMN2 = (SELECT COLUMN2 FROM A WHERE ID = B.ID),
     COLUMN3 = (SELECT COLUMN3 FROM A WHERE ID = B.ID)

回答4:

This is a great help. The code

UPDATE tbl_b b
SET   (  column1,   column2,   column3)
    = (a.column1, a.column2, a.column3)
FROM   tbl_a a
WHERE  b.id = 1
AND    a.id = b.id;

works perfectly.

noted that you need a bracket "" in

From "tbl_a" a

to make it work.

回答5:

Not necessarily what you asked, but maybe using postgres inheritance might help?

CREATE TABLE A (
    ID            int,
    column1       text,
    column2       text,
    column3       text
);

CREATE TABLE B (
    column4       text
) INHERITS (A);

This avoids the need to update B.

But be sure to read all the details.

Otherwise, what you ask for is not considered a good practice - dynamic stuff such as views with SELECT * ... are discouraged (as such slight convenience might break more things than help things), and what you ask for would be equivalent for the UPDATE ... SET command.

回答6:

you can build and execute dynamic sql to do this, but its really not ideal

回答7:

Try Following

Update A a, B b, SET a.column1=b.column1 where b.id=1

EDITED:- Update more than one column

Update A a, B b, SET a.column1=b.column1, a.column2=b.column2 where b.id=1