Re: [HACKERS] SELECT ... LIMIT (trial implementation)

> jwieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) writes:
> > I've seen the queryLimit by SET variable stuff and that
> > really can break rewrite rules, triggers or functions. This
> > is because the query limit will be inherited by any query
> > (inserts, updates, deletes too) done by them.
> > [ example snipped ]
> > This is a feature where users can get around rules that
> > ensure data integrity.
>
> Ouch. I think this point is a *fatal* objection to implementing
> query limit as a SET variable. That might be a quick-and-dirty way
> of getting some functionality going, but we can't let it loose on the
> world like that.

OK, I assume you are saying that you like LIMIT/OFFSET in the query, but
not as a SET command that could be unreliable.

Jan has already coded a much more reliable, user-friently way, by
putting the LIMIT/OFFSET in the query, and I think that is the way to
go too.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026