| From: | Pavel Golub <pavel(at)microolap(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rukh Meski <rukh(dot)meski(at)yahoo(dot)ca>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 9.5: UPDATE/DELETE .. ORDER BY .. LIMIT .. |
| Date: | 2014-02-26 11:20:10 |
| Message-ID: | 644409343.20140226132010@gf.microolap.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello, Robert.
You wrote:
RH> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 7:02 PM, Rukh Meski <rukh(dot)meski(at)yahoo(dot)ca> wrote:
>> Sorry, I wanted to minimize the attention my message attracts. I mostly posted it to let people know I plan on working on this for 9.5 to avoid duplicated effort. I will post more documentation and my reasons for wanting this feature in postgre later, if that's all right.
RH> I've wanted this more than once. I suspect it's a pretty hard project, though.
+1 from me. This is the exciting functionality. There was even a poll
in my blog year ago: http://pgolub.wordpress.com/2012/11/23/do-we-need-limit-clause-in-update-and-delete-statements-for-postgresql/
So the results were (for those who don't want check the post):
Yes, for functionality: 194 (61.4%)
No way! 78 (24.7%)
Do not care 44 (13.9%)
RH> --
RH> Robert Haas
RH> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
RH> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
With best wishes,
Pavel mailto:pavel(at)gf(dot)microolap(dot)com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-02-26 12:34:43 | Re: [PATCH] Use MAP_HUGETLB where supported (v3) |
| Previous Message | Emre Hasegeli | 2014-02-26 10:49:10 | Re: GiST support for inet datatypes |