| From: | Yury Bokhoncovich <byg(at)center-f1(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)atentus(dot)com>, "Stephen R(dot) van den Berg" <srb(at)cuci(dot)nl>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Implementation of LIMIT on DELETE and UPDATE statements |
| Date: | 2002-09-23 06:18:30 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0209231314100.17382-100000@panda.center-f1.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Hello!
On Sun, 22 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I see no reason to add stuff to UPDATE/DELETE when a subquery does the
> job just as well. It just seems like bloat.
That's looks funny but can be useful.
Imagine typical usage of LIMIT/OFFSET: pagination of a web-output.
Say, the output is fetched thru "select id,body from articles limit 10
offset 20".
Now, content-admin, surfing the content and looking to the page say 2,
wanna drop all info on THAT page 2.
Guess how it could ease the life for programmer?8)
--
WBR, Yury Bokhoncovich, Senior System Administrator, NOC of F1 Group.
Phone: +7 (3832) 106228, ext.140, E-mail: byg(at)center-f1(dot)ru(dot)
Unix is like a wigwam -- no Gates, no Windows, and an Apache inside.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Karel Zak | 2002-09-23 07:10:24 | Re: [PATCHES] to_char(FM9.9) bug fix |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-09-23 05:26:25 | HISTORY updated for 7.3beta2 |