| From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | jwieck(at)debis(dot)com |
| Cc: | jwieck(at)debis(dot)com, Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] What about LIMIT in SELECT ? |
| Date: | 1998-10-20 17:26:59 |
| Message-ID: | 199810201726.NAA08502@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
> >
> > I agree. Another good thing is that the LIMIT thing will not require a
> > dump/reload, so it is a good candidate for a minor release.
>
> That's wrong, sorry.
>
> The limit thing as I implemented it adds 2 new variables to
> the Query structure. Rewrite rules are stored as querytrees
> and in the existing pg_rewrite entries that would be missing.
Not sure how to address this. Perhaps we could write a query as part of
the upgrade that added these to the existing rules, or we could require
an initdb of all beta users.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-10-21 06:09:26 | Re: [HACKERS] What about LIMIT in SELECT ? |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 1998-10-20 17:22:40 | Re: [HACKERS] What about LIMIT in SELECT ? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | D'Arcy J.M. Cain | 1998-10-20 17:43:30 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 1998-10-20 17:22:40 | Re: [HACKERS] What about LIMIT in SELECT ? |