Re: [HACKERS] Alternative to LIMIT in SELECT ?

From: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp, lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu, marc(at)fallon(dot)classyad(dot)com, eric(at)linux-hw(dot)com, scrappy(at)hub(dot)org, jeff(at)remapcorp(dot)com, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Alternative to LIMIT in SELECT ?
Date: 1998-10-14 05:53:54
Message-ID: 199810140553.OAA22316@srapc451.sra.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>> + #ifdef QUERY_LIMIT
>> + static bool
>> + parse_query_limit(const char *value)
>> + {
>> + int32 limit;
>> +
>> + if (value == NULL) {
>> + reset_query_limit();
>> + return(TRUE);
>> + }
>
>Any idea how 'value' could be null? I could not see how that would
>happen.

Not sure. I just followed the way other set commands are doing.

>I can see how GEQO could have a NULL when you say ON, and no
>value. Same with rplans.

Hmm... I think in that case, 'value' would be 'ON', not NULL. right?
--
Tatsuo Ishii
t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Ivar Helbekkmo 1998-10-14 06:09:26 Re: [HACKERS] Re: inet/cidr/bind
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-10-14 05:12:52 Re: [HACKERS] Alternative to LIMIT in SELECT ?