Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?

From: Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
Date: 2002-08-28 11:39:29
Message-ID: 1030534769.478.3.camel@lerlaptop.lerctr.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql

On Tue, 2002-08-27 at 23:29, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > OK, patch attached. It was actually easier than I thought. We have to
> > decide if we are going to remove the old syntax in 7.4.
>
> I'd say "no". There's no compelling reason to break backward
> compatibility here --- certainly a couple more productions in gram.y
> isn't enough reason.
I agree here. Why intentionally break something that doesn't violate
standards, and would cause people to have to look at all their queries.
I personally hope y'all do *NOT* remove the old syntax.
>
> But I think it'd be sufficient to document only the new syntax.
Why? If both old and new are acceptable, why not document it?
(Just curious, I'm not wedded to it).

--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler(at)lerctr(dot)org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-08-28 13:14:43 Re: Open 7.3 items
Previous Message Sir Mordred The Traitor 2002-08-28 09:51:31 @(#)Mordre Labs advisory 0x0005: Several buffer overruns in PostgreSQL

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-08-28 13:52:40 Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
Previous Message Ivan Jordanov 2002-08-28 11:27:09 Can I use "UPDATE" sql statement in trigger before or after update ?