Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Bug in move 0

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, jutso(at)tpts5(dot)seed(dot)net(dot)tw, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bug in move 0
Date: 2000-06-11 03:56:59
Message-ID: 200006110356.XAA17239@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > I just sent off an email stating that MOVE 0 goes to the end, and that
> > the FETCH manual page says:
> 
> >               Postgres does not currently support this notion; in
> >               fact the value zero is reserved  to  indicate  that
> >               all  rows  should be retrieved and is equivalent to
> >               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >               specifying the ALL keyword.  If the  RELATIVE  key-
> >               word  has  been used, the Postgres assumes that the
> >               user intended SQL92 behavior and returns this error
> >               message.
> 
> > So it seems we are OK.
> 
> We may have documented the behavior, but that doesn't make it right ;-)
> If someone were to submit a patch to change MOVE 0 into a no-op
> (without breaking MOVE ALL of course), I'd vote to apply it.

If we do that, how does one move to the end of a cursor?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-06-11 05:01:00
Subject: Re: Bug in move 0
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-06-11 03:52:25
Subject: Re: Bug in move 0

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group