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

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] SELECT ... LIMIT (trial implementation)
Date: 1998-10-18 16:04:49
Message-ID: 2292.908726689@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> What if someone wants the rows from 500 to the end. Should we allow
> the syntax to be:
> SELECT ... [LIMIT count] [OFFSET offset]
> LIMIT and OFFSET are independent.

I like that syntax the best, but remember we are not inventing in
a green field here. Isn't this a feature that already exists in
other DBMs? We should probably copy their syntax, unless it's
truly spectacularly awful...

regards, tom lane

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 1998-10-18 16:28:07 Re: [HACKERS] backslash in psql output
Previous Message Tom Lane 1998-10-18 16:01:53 Re: [HACKERS] SELECT ... LIMIT (trial implementation)