Re: Why isn't DECLARE CURSOR ... FOR UPDATE supported?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why isn't DECLARE CURSOR ... FOR UPDATE supported? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20427.1071766585@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why isn't DECLARE CURSOR ... FOR UPDATE supported? (Rod Taylor <pg@rbt.ca>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why isn't DECLARE CURSOR ... FOR UPDATE supported?
Re: Why isn't DECLARE CURSOR ... FOR UPDATE supported? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Rod Taylor <pg@rbt.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
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: