Re: allow LIMIT in UPDATE and DELETE

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres general mailing list <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: allow LIMIT in UPDATE and DELETE
Date: 2006-05-19 14:31:24
Message-ID: 29038.1148049084@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com> writes:
> I DO NOT CARE about which rows are deleted.

You can't possibly think that that holds true in general.

> The fact that it is
> nondeterministic can be very clearly specified in the documentation if
> you think it is such a bad thing, but nondeterministic is perfectly
> fine sometimes. There are lots of nondeterminisms in the data base
> world, starting with the ordering of selects if you don't use order
> by, then why don't we force everybody using order by ? Why don't you
> force to use order by on a select with limit ? Why there it is enough
> to say it in the docs that it WILL BE NON_DETERMINISTIC ?

I can tolerate nondeterminism in SELECT because it doesn't change the
data. If you get it wrong you can always do it over. UPDATE/DELETE
need to have higher standards though.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Csaba Nagy 2006-05-19 14:42:20 Re: allow LIMIT in UPDATE and DELETE
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-05-19 14:23:03 Re: SQL & Binary Data Questions