On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Surafel Temesgen <surafel3...@gmail.com>
> the necessity of allowing limit and order by clause to be used with delete
> update statement is discussed in the past and added to the todo list
> preveouse mailing list descissions
See this more recent one:
That patch was not adopted, as I recall, mostly due to the requirement that
it support partitioned tables.
> i attached a small patch for its implementation.
> Notice : inorder to avoid unpredictable result the patch did not allow
> limit clause without order by and vise versal.
I think both of those are ill-advised. To avoid deadlock, it is perfectly
fine to want an order by without a limit.
And to facilitate the reorganization of partitions or the population of new
columns in bite-size chunks, it is also fine to want limit without order by.