Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Limit+Offset query wrong result in Postgres 9.0.3 ?
9 views
Skip to first unread message
urkpostenardr
Oct 11, 2012, 10:55:33 PM10/11/12
to
Hi,
Is this bug in Postgres ?
If yes, is it fixed in latest release ?
Second query should return 2 rows instead of 1 ?
create table t(i int);
insert into t values(1);
insert into t values(2);
insert into t values(3);
pgdb=# select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775806 offset 1;
select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775806 offset 1;
i
2
3
(2 rows)
pgdb=# select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775807 offset 1;
select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775807 offset 1;
i
2
(1 row)
pgdb=#
My server Version is postgres (PostgreSQL) 9.0.3
Thanks in advance!
Is this bug in Postgres ?
If yes, is it fixed in latest release ?
Second query should return 2 rows instead of 1 ?
create table t(i int);
insert into t values(1);
insert into t values(2);
insert into t values(3);
pgdb=# select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775806 offset 1;
select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775806 offset 1;
i
2
3
(2 rows)
pgdb=# select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775807 offset 1;
select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775807 offset 1;
i
2
(1 row)
pgdb=#
My server Version is postgres (PostgreSQL) 9.0.3
Thanks in advance!
Albe Laurenz
Oct 12, 2012, 5:10:40 AM10/12/12
to
I get the result that you would expect.
Which operating system and architecture is that?
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-...@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
Alban Hertroys
Oct 12, 2012, 6:33:52 AM10/12/12
to
On 12 October 2012 04:55, urkpostenardr <urkpos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is this bug in Postgres ?
> If yes, is it fixed in latest release ?
> Second query should return 2 rows instead of 1 ?
>
> create table t(i int);
> insert into t values(1);
> insert into t values(2);
> insert into t values(3);
> pgdb=# select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775806 offset 1;
> select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775806 offset 1;
> i
> 2
> 3
> (2 rows)
> pgdb=# select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775807 offset 1;
> select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775807 offset 1;
> i
> 2
> (1 row)
> pgdb=#
You seem to have hit the end of a 32-bit signed integer and it wraps
> Hi,
>
> Is this bug in Postgres ?
> If yes, is it fixed in latest release ?
> Second query should return 2 rows instead of 1 ?
>
> create table t(i int);
> insert into t values(1);
> insert into t values(2);
> insert into t values(3);
> pgdb=# select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775806 offset 1;
> select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775806 offset 1;
> i
> 2
> 3
> (2 rows)
> pgdb=# select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775807 offset 1;
> select i from t order by i limit 9223372036854775807 offset 1;
> i
> 2
> (1 row)
> pgdb=#
around. There's probably some internal code that modifies limit-values
<1 to 1, or you wouldn't have gotten any results at all...
It does seem a fairly insane number to use for limit, it's probably
better to leave it out if you're going to accept that many results.
--
If you can't see the forest for the trees,
Cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest.
Josh Kupershmidt
Oct 12, 2012, 2:58:31 PM10/12/12
to
Josh
0 new messages