From: | "Cristian Prieto" <cristian(at)clickdiario(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Support for Limit in Update, Insert... |
Date: | 2005-09-09 01:19:34 |
Message-ID: | 03f901c5b4dc$8a530ab0$6500a8c0@gt.ClickDiario.local |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Maybe the first 1000 rows based in the primary index????
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Cristian Prieto" <cristian(at)clickdiario(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 6:05 PM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Support for Limit in Update, Insert...
> "Cristian Prieto" <cristian(at)clickdiario(dot)com> writes:
>> Would be any future support for limit in update/insert queries? so you =
>> could do something like
>> update table1 set col1=3Dvalue1 limit 1000;
>> would update just the first 1000 rows in the table.
>
> That seems like a spectacularly bad idea, considering that you could
> have no guarantees about *which* 1000 rows get updated.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
> choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
> match
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alex | 2005-09-09 01:31:46 | Formatting TimeStamp |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-09-09 00:05:59 | Re: Support for Limit in Update, Insert... |