Re: [SQL] LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Larry Rosenman wrote:
>> Why? If both old and new are acceptable, why not document it? 
>> (Just curious, I'm not wedded to it). 

> Well, showing both versions adds confusion for no good reason,

Yes, particularly considering that LIMIT ... FOR UPDATE corresponds
to the implementation behavior (LIMIT acts before FOR UPDATE) while
FOR UPDATE ... LIMIT does not.

I concur with documenting only the preferred form (though there should
be a note in gram.y explaining that we're supporting the old syntax
for backward compatibility).
        regards, tom lane