* Tim Landscheidt (tim@tim-landscheidt.de) wrote:
> > Just thinking about it now; do SQL's semantics say it'll always do
> > the right thing? PG does in a couple of quick tests (i.e. one where
> > customer is a small table and PG prefers a seqscan and where it's larger
> > and prefers an index scan) but I'm not sure if this could change.
>
> PostgreSQL's documentation on VALUES has at least no guaran-
> tee of the order of data. I'd prefer David's solution :-).
Uhm, that's why there's an explicit ORDER BY.. I seriously doubt that
would ever be violated. If there was an approach suggested which didn't
include an ORDER BY *somewhere*, I'd be suspect of it.
Thanks,
Stephen
