Re: 9.5: UPDATE/DELETE .. ORDER BY .. LIMIT ..
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 9.5: UPDATE/DELETE .. ORDER BY .. LIMIT .. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMJD_LmS-8utCGJBE2sSh_XCUtyX09ta4VWkDWKZaSewpA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 9.5: UPDATE/DELETE .. ORDER BY .. LIMIT .. (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: 9.5: UPDATE/DELETE .. ORDER BY .. LIMIT ..
Re: 9.5: UPDATE/DELETE .. ORDER BY .. LIMIT .. |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11 May 2014 07:37, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > Tom Lane has explained these problems in a very clear manner > in his below mail and shared his opinion about this feature as > well. > http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/26819.1291133045@sss.pgh.pa.us I don't have Tom's wonderfully articulate way of saying things, so I'll say it my way: If you want to do this, you already can already write a query that has the same effect. But supporting the syntax directly to execute a statement with an undefinable outcome is a pretty bad idea, and worse than that, there's a ton of useful things that we *do* want that would be a much higher priority for work than this. If you support Postgres, prioritise, please. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: