| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Timothy H(dot) Keitt" <Timothy(dot)Keitt(at)SUNYSB(dot)Edu> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: offset and limit in update and subselect |
| Date: | 2001-02-24 22:07:54 |
| Message-ID: | 15319.983052474@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Timothy H. Keitt" <Timothy(dot)Keitt(at)SUNYSB(dot)Edu> writes:
> Basically, I need to update rows by offset from the beginning of the
> table.
I think you'd better rethink your data design. Tuple order in a table
is not a defined concept according to SQL. Even if we allowed queries
such as you've described, the results would not be well-defined, but
would change at the slightest provocation. The implementation feels
itself entitled to rearrange tuple order whenever the whim strikes it.
As the documentation tries hard to make plain, LIMIT/OFFSET are only
guaranteed to produce reproducible results if there's also an ORDER BY
that constrains the tuples into a unique ordering.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-02-24 22:20:06 | Re: A patch for xlog.c |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-02-24 21:58:16 | Re: pg_atoi() behavior change? Intentional? |