From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: Rod Taylor <rbt@zort.ca>
Cc: Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 19:53:50 -0400
Message-ID: <22787.1030578830@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200208281927.46634.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
References: <200208282106.g7SL6wR03197@candle.pha.pa.us>
<200208281927.46634.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
>> If you would like a vote, we can do that, but as I remember we had the
>> same issue with COPY and we got most votes to just show the best syntax.
Perhaps we could compromise on showing only the new syntax in the <synopsis>
part of the man page, and then mentioning somewhere in the body of the
page that the other order is deprecated but accepted for backwards
compatibility. This same approach would work well for documenting
COPY's old syntax.
regards, tom lane
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, xzilla@users.sourceforge.net, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, peter_e@gmx.net, rbt@zort.ca, ler@lerctr.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
In-Reply-To: <22787.1030578830@sss.pgh.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