On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 22:53:58 +0100, Graham Binns <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday, October 7, 2010, Michael Hudson > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Back in the SQLObject days we had a hack that would add "ORDER BY > > random()" to any query that didn't have an ORDER BY already. Â Do we > > still have that? Â Although in this case it seems we had an ORDER BY, > > just not a sufficienly discriminating one. Â Could you add ", random()" > > to any query that does have an ORDER BY? > > > > Wouldn't that just break everything that relied on a specific ordering?
Not if the ordering was already specific enough to be unambiguous, and if it's not specific enough to be unambiguous, it's a timebomb. Cheers, mwh _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
