From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@atentus.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org>
Subject: Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 17:23:06 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <200208272123.g7RLN6b20062@candle.pha.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208271718540.5950-100000@cm-lcon1-46-187.cm.vtr.net>
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, Pennsylvania 19073
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, alvherre@atentus.com, pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
In-Reply-To: <200208272123.g7RLN6b20062@candle.pha.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox