| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Csaba Nagy <ncslists(at)googlemail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, 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 15:14:21 |
| Message-ID: | 4CF514CD.6040201@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/30/2010 09:57 AM, Csaba Nagy wrote:
>
> So it is really an ideological thing and not lack of demand or
> implementation attempts... I for myself can't write working C code
> anyway, so I got my peace with the workaround - I wish you good luck
> arguing Tom :-)
>
>
We need a convincing use case for it. So far the only one that's seemed
at all convincing to me is the one about deleting in batches. But that
might be enough.
As for it being illogical, I don't think it's any more so than
DELETE FROM foo WHERE random() < 0.1;
and you can do that today.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-11-30 15:26:27 | Re: GiST insert algorithm rewrite |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-11-30 15:04:20 | Re: DELETE with LIMIT (or my first hack) |