On 2015-02-04 12:23:51 +0100, Marko Tiikkaja wrote: > On 2/4/15 12:13 PM, Stephen R. van den Berg wrote: > >If you know beforehand the query might generate more than one row (SELECT) > >yet you also know that you are not interested in those, then maxrows=1 > >is best; then again, modifying the query to include a LIMIT 1 is even > >better, in which case maxrows can be zero again. > > This seems to be a common pattern, and I think it's a *huge* mistake to > specify maxrows=1 and/or ignore rows after the first one in the driver > layer. If the user says "give me the only row returned by this query", the > interface should check that only one row is in reality returned by the > query
I don't think these are what this thread is about. It's about a UPDATE (=> no LIMIT) where the user uses a driver interface that doesn't return rows generated by the UPDATE (the above error check doesn't make sense). Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
