Re: MOVE LAST: why?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: MOVE LAST: why?
Date: 2003-01-08 04:33:21
Message-ID: 863.1042000401@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces

Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Sure. FETCH n in Postgres has always corresponded to FETCH RELATIVE n.

> IIRC in SQL standard FETCH retrieves rows one by one.

Yes, Postgres' idea of FETCH is only weakly related to the spec's idea.
But I believe you get similar results if you consider only the row last
returned by our FETCH.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-01-08 04:39:27 Re: MOVE LAST: why?
Previous Message Hiroshi Inoue 2003-01-08 04:15:34 Re: MOVE LAST: why?

Browse pgsql-interfaces by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-01-08 04:39:27 Re: MOVE LAST: why?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-01-08 04:23:38 Re: still memory leaks with libpgtcl