From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Flancer <huongch(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Break both? (Was To Postgres Devs : Wouldn't changing |
Date: | 2001-10-18 16:27:33 |
Message-ID: | 200110181627.f9IGRXK16195@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Ok so if both were broken then??? ERm what are we going to use??
> Frankly, I thought Postgres (prior to 7.2) select limit actually made
> more sense to use than mysql..
>
> Hmm I can see some DB abstraction programmers banging their heads now
> on this issue...
>
> I happen to be using something called ADODB (php.weblogs.com) which
> uses the select limit in its pageexecute method (cool convenient way
> of making next and previous links..).
We are not removing LIMIT at all. We are discussing changing or removing
LIMIT #,# and requiring people to use LIMIT # OFFSET #.
Obviously, in LIMIT #,#, it is not at all clear which one is the LIMIT
and which one is the OFFSET because it has been backwards from MySQL and
few people even realized it. I can see no compelling reason to support
LIMIT #,# when the clearer LIMIT # OFFSET # can be used instead.
The only reason to have LIMIT #,# is for MySQL compatibility, and we
obviously don't have that becuase we are backwards.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Holt, Jack C. | 2001-10-18 17:05:03 | Re: TEXT field's length limit in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2001-10-18 16:08:07 | Re: Getting OID after Insert |