Re: MOVE LAST: why?

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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
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

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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

Browse pgsql-interfaces by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message D'Arcy J.M. Cain 2003-01-08 02:51:48 Re: [ADMIN] is still wrong in Postgres 7.3.1 rpm
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-01-07 23:29:02 Re: MOVE LAST: why?