> 1. Define it as a feature not a bug. People do occasionally ask for
> "UPDATE foo ... LIMIT 1" after all. But this is a pretty klugy way of
> getting that, and the arguments that say allowing LIMIT on updating
> queries would be a bad idea haven't lost their force.
Being one of those who was asking for an UPDATE/DELETE with limit, I
would be very glad if this would be implemented... it would be a big
help for batch-processing data in OLTP environment (no long running
queries allowed). I still don't see why would nondeterminism be
generally a bad thing when there are applications which don't care about
that...
Cheers,
Csaba.
