From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Ross J(dot) Reedstrom" <reedstrm(at)rice(dot)edu>, Roland Roberts <roland(at)astrofoto(dot)org>, Yudie <yudie(at)axiontech(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: How to select and result row number?? |
Date: | 2002-09-17 22:21:17 |
Message-ID: | 200209172221.g8HMLH227467@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> >>> select nextval('temp_counter'), * from (select .... order by ...);
> >>
> >> Approximately the same solution, but without saving the result in a temp
> >> table.
>
> > I thought about doing it this way. However, a subselect as a
> > pseudotable is not guaranteed to return the data in any specific order,
> > so I don't think this method work work reliably.
>
> Say what? Given the ORDER BY in the subselect, it will.
>
> Of course, you can't do any grouping or other processing at the outer
> level, but the example as given is just fine.
When you specify a table in FROM, there is no ordering to the table. Is
it guaranteed that a subquery in FROM _does_ have an ordering. Does
ANSI say it has an ordering? What if the subquery is involved in a
join?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-17 22:31:00 | Re: cannot delete bug |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-17 22:13:16 | Re: How to select and result row number?? |