Regarding Oracle's ROWNUM - since they have to use that instead of OFFSET
and LIMIT, that isn't much of an argument for the Oracle way. When
converting queries into Oracle SQL, I always _really_ miss OFFSET and
LIMIT. They are much easier to use than ROWNUM, especially with ORDER BY.
I think that more databases support OFFSET and LIMIT than ROWNUM (the
Oracle way).
Personally, I have never wanted a DELETE or UPDATE with LIMIT. The one
time I did something similar in Oracle, I used partitions, and just dropped
or truncated the partition containing the old data.
Susan
Csaba Nagy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Postgres general
mailing list <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Sent by: cc:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL]
allow LIMIT in UPDATE and DELETE
[EMAIL PROTECTED] |-------------------|
tgresql.org | [ ] Expand Groups |
|-------------------|
05/19/2006 07:22
AM
Well, first of all, you're not competing here with MySQL in this case, but
with Oracle. Our application does this using Oracle's ROWNUM trick and it
works perfectly fine. Now I guess you think Oracle's ROWNUM is also stupid
in this case, but it certainly helps us writing cleaner SQL, and a missing
postgres alternative which is easy to use won't help you in attracting
Oracle users.
Cheers,
Csaba.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Simply protected storage solutions ensure that your information is
automatically safe, readily available and always there, visit us at
http://www.overlandstorage.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
