Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> There is *no* credible use case for this (hint: MOVE FORWARD/BACKWARD
> >> ALL does not need this to work for >2G tables).
> 
> > Already done because of bad coding.  You want the TODO item removed too?
> 
> As I said, I see no use case for it.  Maybe if Moore's Law holds up for
> another five or ten years, it'll look like a useful feature then ...

Removed.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian   bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
  EnterpriseDB    http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

• Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Change FETCH/MOVE to use int8. at 2006-09-03 04:49:41 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Jeroen T. Vermeulen	Date: 2006-09-03 14:27:47
	Subject: Re: Optimizing prepared statements
Previous:	From: Gregory Stark	Date: 2006-09-03 11:41:37
	Subject: Re: Optimizing prepared statements

pgsql-committers by date

Next:	From: User Andrewd	Date: 2006-09-03 15:28:55
	Subject: pgbuildfarm - client-code: Don't ignore files listed in a cvsignore file
Previous:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2006-09-03 13:37:38
	Subject: pgsql: Remove: < * Change LIMIT/OFFSET and FETCH/MOVE to use int8

pgsql-patches by date

Next:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2006-09-03 16:08:58
	Subject: Re: CSStorm occurred again by postgreSQL8.2
Previous:	From: Michael Glaesemann	Date: 2006-09-03 11:51:46
	Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Interval aggregate regression failure (expected seems