Sam Mason <s...@samason.me.uk> wrote: >> > SELECT c.* >> > FROM customer c, ( >> > SELECT *, row_number() OVER () >> > FROM (VALUES (23), (56), (2), (12), (10)) x) x(val,ord) >> > WHERE c.id = x.val >> > ORDER BY x.ord;
>> Wow, that's really cool and a nice case for row_number(). > Just thinking about it now; do SQL's semantics say it'll always do > the right thing? PG does in a couple of quick tests (i.e. one where > customer is a small table and PG prefers a seqscan and where it's larger > and prefers an index scan) but I'm not sure if this could change. PostgreSQL's documentation on VALUES has at least no guaran- tee of the order of data. I'd prefer David's solution :-). Tim -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
