Re: move 0 behaviour

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Dave Cramer <dave(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: move 0 behaviour
Date: 2002-11-02 04:49:32
Message-ID: 17718.1036212572@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Do not hack up PerformPortalFetch; put the special case for INT_MAX in
>> utility.c's FetchStmt code, instead. As-is, you probably broke other
>> callers of PerformPortalFetch.

> I thought about that, but I need to fail if the cursor name is invalid.

What has that got to do with it?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-11-02 05:41:28 Re: move 0 behaviour
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-11-02 03:51:33 Re: pg_restore error

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-11-02 04:52:33 Re: 7.2.3 vacuum bug
Previous Message Larry Rosenman 2002-11-02 04:17:09 Re: 7.3B3 psql talking to a 7.2.3 server?

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-11-02 05:41:28 Re: move 0 behaviour
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-11-02 03:14:56 Re: move 0 behaviour