| 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: | Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] union and LIMIT problem |
| Date: | 1999-11-30 02:41:44 |
| Message-ID: | 199911300241.VAA22646@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Can I assume this is fixed? I see it marked on the TODO list.
>
> Yes, I think it is (barring a counterexample from someone ... the
> UNION rewriter is awfully crufty ...).
>
> It might be nice to allow LIMIT to be attached to subselects rather
> than just the top level, but I have no idea what it would take in the
> executor to implement that. I could handle fixing the parser & planner
> if someone else wants to fix it in the executor.
Let's wait for someone to ask for it.
--
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 | 1999-11-30 02:57:34 | Re: [HACKERS] Arrays broken on temp tables |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-11-30 02:40:55 | Re: [HACKERS] IN clause and INTERSECT not behaving as expected |