From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: Rod Taylor <rbt@zort.ca>
Cc: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
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 23:01:25 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208282239360.6465-100000@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200208281438.g7SEcw515550@candle.pha.pa.us>
Bruce Momjian writes:
> That SELECT syntax is already too confusing. I don't want to add an
> additional documentation specification that provides no value to users.
The value of the documentation, especially the reference manual, is that
it provides an authorative source of what works and what doesn't. It is
not the place to hide transitional phases. Moreover, the least possible
value you could provide to users is to gratuitously[*] change the syntax
and not tell anyone about it.
[*] It's not like this will magically gain us MySQL or Oracle
compatibility.
In fact, the recent trend in the SQL commands has been to accept most
options in any order, so it would only be logical to accept the LIMIT and
FOR UDPATE options in any order and document that fact. There is a
separate section in each reference page for information about which format
is compatible with what.
But please remember that our foremost goal is to be compatible, both in
actuality and in mindset, with PostgreSQL, not with any other product that
happened to use a slightly different syntax at their whim.
Therefore I request that both forms be accepted and documented as equally
valid.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net
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: peter_e@gmx.net, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, rbt@zort.ca, xzilla@users.sourceforge.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, ler@lerctr.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208282239360.6465-100000@localhost.localdomain>
* 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