doc: Make UPDATE FROM examples consistent

The original first half of the example used an employees table and an
accounts.sales_person foreign key column, while the second half (added
in commit 8f889b1083f) used a salesmen table and accounts.sales_id
for the foreign key.  This makes everything use the original names.

Author: Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker 
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]

diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/ref/update.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/ref/update.sgml
index 3a0285df7934ab2fdcb22edda8231c033cb48e65..2ab24b0523ef2dde94dd427c4a1cc2d64032162c 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/src/sgml/ref/update.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/ref/update.sgml
@@ -387,23 +387,23 @@ UPDATE employees SET sales_count = sales_count + 1 WHERE id =
 
   
    Update contact names in an accounts table to match the currently assigned
-   salesmen:
+   salespeople:
 
 UPDATE accounts SET (contact_first_name, contact_last_name) =
-    (SELECT first_name, last_name FROM salesmen
-     WHERE salesmen.id = accounts.sales_id);
+    (SELECT first_name, last_name FROM employees
+     WHERE employees.id = accounts.sales_person);
 
    A similar result could be accomplished with a join:
 
 UPDATE accounts SET contact_first_name = first_name,
                     contact_last_name = last_name
-  FROM salesmen WHERE salesmen.id = accounts.sales_id;
+  FROM employees WHERE employees.id = accounts.sales_person;
 
    However, the second query may give unexpected results
-   if salesmen.id is not a unique key, whereas
+   if employees.id is not a unique key, whereas
    the first query is guaranteed to raise an error if there are multiple
    id matches.  Also, if there is no match for a particular
-   accounts.sales_id entry, the first query
+   accounts.sales_person entry, the first query
    will set the corresponding name fields to NULL, whereas the second query
    will not update that row at all.