Re: LIMIT NULL

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: LIMIT NULL
Date: 2009-02-02 21:10:15
Message-ID: 2511.1233609015@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> On Feb 2, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Seems to me that the SELECT reference page is a more appropriate place
>> for this type of detail. I've applied a patch there.

> What about both?

We don't really have space to document every little niggling detail in
two places; if we did that, the main docs would become unreadably dense.

(I think it's justifiable to regard this as a "niggling detail" because
no one's asked about it before.)

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David E. Wheeler 2009-02-02 21:44:15 Re: LIMIT NULL
Previous Message David E. Wheeler 2009-02-02 20:52:50 Re: LIMIT NULL