ADQL evolution: OFFSET?

[Mark Taylor]

On Thu, 21 Jan 2016, Walter Landry wrote:

> Markus Demleitner <msdemlei at ari.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote:
> > The result would be, for ADQL,
> > 
> > <order_by_clause> ::= 
> >   ORDER BY <sort_specification_list> <result offset clause>
> > <result offset clause> ::=
> >   OFFSET <unsigned integer>
> > 
> > -- which is a relevant simplification, in particular restricting
> > ourselves to unsigned integers, but I propose that's a good idea.
> > Dropping the ROW[S], however, makes this not even a proper subset of
> > SQL 2008.  So, if anyone stands up and says "let's keep the ROW[S]",
> > I'll have no choice but to concur.
> 
> Let's keep the ROW[S].  We should not make it gratuitously different
> from SQL.

Yeah.  Instead of the reek of COBOL, try thinking of it as retro chic.

--
Mark Taylor   Astronomical Programmer   Physics, Bristol University, UK
m.b.taylor at bris.ac.uk +44-117-9288776  http://www.star.bris.ac.uk/~mbt/