| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Daniel Loureiro <loureirorg(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: DELETE with LIMIT (or my first hack) |
| Date: | 2010-11-30 15:04:20 |
| Message-ID: | 25464.1291129460@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>> I can't say I'd be excited by this feature. In quite a few years of writing
>> SQL I don't recall ever wanting such a gadget.
> It's something I've wanted periodically, though not badly enough to do
> the work to make it happen.
It would certainly look like nothing but a crude hack if the feature is
only available for DELETE and not UPDATE. Unfortunately, the UPDATE
case would be an order of magnitude harder (think inheritance trees
where the children aren't all alike).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-11-30 15:14:21 | Re: DELETE with LIMIT (or my first hack) |
| Previous Message | Csaba Nagy | 2010-11-30 14:57:13 | Re: DELETE with LIMIT (or my first hack) |