Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>>>IMHO "LIMIT n OFFSET n" is far more readable than "LIMIT m,n" anyway.
>>>(Quick: which number is first in the comma version? By what reasoning
>>>could you deduce that if you'd forgotten?) So I think we should
>>>deprecate and eventually eliminate the comma version, if we're not
>>>going to conform to the de facto standard for it.
>>
>>I agree that LIMIT n OFFSET n is by far the most readable format, and is
>>therefore the desirable format. But I am not sure about deprecating and
>>eliminating the other syntax. Above all it should be avoided that it is
>>now deprecated but is included in the next SQL standard and has to be
>>added again.
>
> I am confused. While LIMIT and OFFSET may are potential SQL standard
> reserved words, I don't see how LIMIT #,# would ever be a standard
> specification. Do you see this somewhere I am missing. Again, LIMIT
> #,# is the only syntax we are removing.
If you are confident that LIMIT #,# would never be an official SQL
standard who am I to second guess that ;) I don't see that possibility
anywhere either, but I just wanted to make sure. The possibility that it
might become an official standard is the only objection I had against
deprecating and eventual elimination of that syntax.
LIMIT # OFFSET # has my vote.
Jochem
