| 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: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: MOVE LAST: why? |
| Date: | 2003-01-08 00:05:27 |
| Message-ID: | 27934.1041984327@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Refresh my memory: what is the point of inventing an additional LAST
>> keyword, when the behavior is exactly the same as MOVE ALL ?
> SQL compatibility, per Peter.
Oh, I see. But then really it should be documented as a FETCH keyword,
not only a MOVE keyword. Will fix.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | carl garland | 2003-01-08 01:07:39 | Re: [HACKERS] Have people taken a look at pgdiff yet? |
| Previous Message | Jean-Luc Lachance | 2003-01-07 23:59:45 | Re: [HACKERS] I feel the need for speed. What am I doing |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | D'Arcy J.M. Cain | 2003-01-08 02:51:48 | Re: [ADMIN] pgdb.py is still wrong in Postgres 7.3.1 rpm |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-01-07 23:29:02 | Re: MOVE LAST: why? |