Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-perl-modperl-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 35648 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2006 20:06:22 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 31 Mar 2006 20:06:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 42718 invoked by uid 500); 31 Mar 2006 20:06:15 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-perl-modperl-archive@perl.apache.org Received: (qmail 42704 invoked by uid 500); 31 Mar 2006 20:06:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact modperl-help@perl.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list modperl@perl.apache.org Received: (qmail 42692 invoked by uid 99); 31 Mar 2006 20:06:15 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 31 Mar 2006 12:06:15 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [216.158.52.11] (HELO mail.liminalflux.net) (216.158.52.11) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 31 Mar 2006 12:06:14 -0800 Received: from localhost (dalereuth.liminalflux.net [127.0.0.1]) by mail.liminalflux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB0F0381D8 for ; Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:05:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail.liminalflux.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.liminalflux.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 07779-01 for ; Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:05:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from [10.1.10.90] (unknown [141.151.66.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.liminalflux.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFFF7381C9 for ; Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:05:50 -0500 (EST) From: Malcolm J Harwood To: modperl@perl.apache.org Subject: Re: Database transaction across multiple web requests Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 15:04:51 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <20060331115956.GA23657@www.trapp.net> <20060331130057.e72d6fe9.frank@wiles.org> <8E40D949-A120-4CE8-9633-44AF4C91CB60@2xlp.com> In-Reply-To: <8E40D949-A120-4CE8-9633-44AF4C91CB60@2xlp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200603311504.54598.mjhlist-modperl@liminalflux.net> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at liminalflux.net X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Friday 31 March 2006 02:10 pm, Jonathan Vanasco wrote: > On Mar 31, 2006, at 2:00 PM, Frank Wiles wrote: > > Yup, you're right I just double checked and there isn't a LIMIT/ > > OFFSET > > in the SQL standard. For someone reason... probably because it's so > > freaking useful, I assumed it was. :) > > I was pretty floored when i found out myself. I *think* more dbs > tend to do LIMIT x OFFSET x from what i've seen, but its just not in > the spec. Crazy. Just to be different, MS-SQL uses TOP... which goes at the begining of the query, not the end: SELECT TOP 10 ... rather than SELECT ... LIMIT 10. :-/ -- "The Universe doesn't give you any points for doing things that are easy." - Sheridan to Garibaldi in Babylon 5:"The Geometry of Shadows"