Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77A3747605B for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:16:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from candle.pha.pa.us (216-55-132-35.dsl.san-diego.abac.net [216.55.132.35]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64054476030 for ; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:16:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from pgman@localhost) by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) id g7TFGKQ07819; Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:16:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Bruce Momjian Message-Id: <200208291516.g7TFGKQ07819@candle.pha.pa.us> Subject: Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1? In-Reply-To: <21386.1030599241@sss.pgh.pa.us> To: Tom Lane Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 11:16:20 -0400 (EDT) Cc: Rod Taylor , Robert Treat , Peter Eisentraut , Larry Rosenman , PostgreSQL-development X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL99 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200208/2122 X-Sequence-Number: 27805 Tom Lane wrote: > BTW, I'd like to see the old COPY syntax still documented, but in the > same way --- it need not be in the synopsis, just somewhere where people > can see it without having to refer back to old manuals. Agreed. -- 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