On Dec 13, 2007 9:43 PM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca> 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 | jonah.harris@enterprisedb.com
Edison, NJ 08837 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/