Bruce Momjian wrote: >>Bruce Momjian writes: >> >> >>>>Break the SQL code that has been implemented for prior versions?? >>>> Bummer ;((. >>>> >>>Yes, but we don't follow the MySQL behavior, which we copied when we >>>added LIMIT. Seems we should agree with their implementation. >>> >>Isn't it much worse to not follow PostgreSQL behavior than to not follow >>MySQL behavior? >> > > Another idea: because our historical Limit #,# differs from MySQL, one > idea is to disable LIMIT #,# completely and instead print an error > stating they have to use LIMIT # OFFSET #. Although that would break > both MySQl and old PostgreSQL queries, it would not generate incorrect > results.
I would say the relevant behaviour is neither the one that MySQL historically uses nor the one that PostgreSQL historically uses, but the one that is specified in the relevant standards. Since nobody brought this up yet I presume these standards leave the implementation of LIMIT open (I tried to google myself, but I couldn't exactly find it). Is that correct or does (any of the) the SQL standards specify a behaviour? Jochem ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
