Re: Why isn't DECLARE CURSOR ... FOR UPDATE supported?

Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
> On Thu, 2003-12-18 at 10:20, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Is there any good reason for this restriction?

> The help implies you can.

> DECLARE name [ BINARY ] [ INSENSITIVE ] [ [ NO ] SCROLL ]
> CURSOR [ { WITH | WITHOUT } HOLD ] FOR query
> [ FOR { READ ONLY | UPDATE [ OF column [, ...] ] } ]

Hmm. Actually that is describing the SQL spec's syntax for DECLARE
CURSOR, in which you can name specific *columns* not tables as being
updatable through the cursor. Now that I think about it, the error
check is probably there to catch anyone who writes "FOR UPDATE OF
column" expecting to get the SQL spec behavior.

I'm not sure whether anyone is planning to try to converge our notion of
FOR UPDATE with the spec's. If that is going to happen someday, it'd
probably be best not to introduce directly conflicting behavior into
DECLARE CURSOR. Oh well...

regards, tom lane