RE: Are these suppose to be equivalent?

I thought this looked liked a correlated subquery and wondered if, perhaps, it might be called a correlated update. And it is! This was never covered in any SQL class or reading that I have done. asktom has a little discussion on it, including (I think) how to handle the NOT 1:1 case (Thanks M. Powell.). Search asktom (or even google) for "correlated update".

Now, the question I have is: Between the correlated update, and the "for update/where current of", is one method inherently better than the other? Or is it six of one and a half dozen of the other? It depends? Either way appears to lock all the updated rows.

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l