I can't get through to you because your spam filter blocks my SMTP
Tom Lane wrote:
> > I now have a quite similar problem: while a CURSOR on a SELECT for a
> > normal query works now, I encounter the same behavior for aggregate
> > queries:
> As I think I pointed out in the original discussion, backwards fetch
> doesn't work for most plan types more complex than a simple sequential
> or index scan. This is not trivial to fix.
> regards, tom lane
I've looked trough our exchange on the list, but there's nothing about
I found another posting which I guess you mean
I have put a comment in the interactive documentation for now, quoting
your original mail. This really should be in the distributed
documentation for FETCH.
So can I be sure that every non-aggregate SELECT on tables joined with
unique indexes works, independent of the WHERE or ORDER BY?
Is anybody working on implementing this functionality?
pgsql-docs by date
|Next:||From: Vicki Brown||Date: 2003-02-12 04:01:21|
|Subject: discrepancy between "make check" output and documentation|
|Previous:||From: Eduardo||Date: 2003-02-10 23:53:13|
|Subject: PL/PGSQL TUTORIAL|
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Alexander Stanier||Date: 2003-02-11 13:08:09|
|Subject: Referential Integrity|
|Previous:||From: Elias Athanasopoulos||Date: 2003-02-10 22:13:44|
|Subject: Re: cvs (7/2/2003) broken?|