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

> jwieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) writes:
> >     I've seen the queryLimit  by  SET  variable  stuff  and  that
> >     really  can  break rewrite rules, triggers or functions. This
> >     is because the query limit will be  inherited  by  any  query
> >     (inserts, updates, deletes too) done by them.
> >     [ example snipped ]
> >     This is a feature where  users  can  get  around  rules  that
> >     ensure data integrity.
>
> Ouch.  I think this point is a *fatal* objection to implementing
> query limit as a SET variable.  That might be a quick-and-dirty way
> of getting some functionality going, but we can't let it loose on the
> world like that.

OK, I assume you are saying that you like LIMIT/OFFSET in the query, but
not as a SET command that could be unreliable.

Jan has already coded a much more reliable, user-friently way, by
putting the LIMIT/OFFSET in the query, and I think that is the way to
go too.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026