* Tim Landscheidt (tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > Just thinking about it now; do SQL's semantics say it'll always do > > the right thing? PG does in a couple of quick tests (i.e. one where > > customer is a small table and PG prefers a seqscan and where it's larger > > and prefers an index scan) but I'm not sure if this could change. > > PostgreSQL's documentation on VALUES has at least no guaran- > tee of the order of data. I'd prefer David's solution :-). Uhm, that's why there's an explicit ORDER BY.. I seriously doubt that would ever be violated. If there was an approach suggested which didn't include an ORDER BY *somewhere*, I'd be suspect of it. Thanks, Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
