Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
Date
Msg-id 200208272123.g7RLN6b20062@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian dijo: 
> 
> > OK, no one has commented on this, so I guess I am going to have to guess
> > the group's preference.
> > 
> > My guess, seeing as very few probably use LIMIT and FOR UPDATE together,
> > is to swap them and document it in the release notes.  Was I correct in
> > my guess?
> 
> Is it possible to support both ways for a couple of releases? Mention
> the backwards one as "deprecated" in release notes, and drop it in 7.4.

Yes, it is possible, but the grammar will have to be a little tricky, if
that's OK with everyone.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Larry Rosenman
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposed GUC Variable
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?