Re: cursor sensitivity misunderstanding

On 09.03.21 00:22, David G. Johnston wrote:
> I came up with the attached patch to sort this out a bit.  It does not
> change any cursor behavior.  But the documentation now uses the terms
> more correctly and explains the differences between SQL and the
> PostgreSQL implementation better, I think.
>
>
> thanks!, though this seems like the wrong approach.  Simply noting that
> our cursor is not standard compliant (or at least we don't implement a
> standard-compliant sensitive cursor) should suffice.

Well, we could just say, our behavior wrong/different. But I think it's
actually right, we were just looking at an incorrect premise and making
additional claims about it that are not accurate.

> I don't really get
> the point of adding ASENSITIVE if we don't have SENSITIVE too.  I'm also
> unfamiliar with the standard default behaviors to comment on where we
> differ there - but that should be easy enough to address.

ASENSITIVE is merely a keyword to select the default behavior. Other
SQL implementations also have it, so it seems sensible to add it while
we're polishing this.