Re: LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: magnus(dot)enbom(at)rockstorm(dot)se, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
Date: 2002-08-27 23:18:25
Message-ID: 200208272318.g7RNIP325016@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > My guess, seeing as very few probably use LIMIT and FOR UPDATE together,
> > is to swap them and document it in the release notes.
>
> That will surely piss someone off. Can't you try a little harder to
> support either order?

Sure. I just needed someone to say they want it before doing the work.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karl DeBisschop 2002-08-27 23:18:38 Re: Proposed GUC Variable
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-08-27 23:17:36 Re: Proposed GUC Variable

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2002-08-28 01:45:55 Re: LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2002-08-27 22:38:45 Re: triggers and plpgsql question