On Dec 13, 2007 9:43 PM, Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I dimly remember some discussion of this issue once before, maybe a year > ago. My memory isn't what it was, and I can't find it by trolling archives, > but I recall Tom saying that it was dumb, yes, but don't do that, because > there's some reason not to change it. I know, helpful search terms R me.
Man, maybe my mad Google skillz are not as mad as I thought :( The best I could come up with was on my first try, though as it's just a reply to a user asking for a different behavior of it, I doubt this is it: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2002-10/msg01293.php Google search terms: site:archives.postgresql.org "tom lane" "limit -1" "negative" While I haven't looked at the code myself, I tend to agree with Simon and Greg... I know of no reason to allow a negative limit/offset. -- Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324 EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301 499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
