Re: MOVE LAST: why?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: MOVE LAST: why? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 22435.1042065746@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: MOVE LAST: why? (Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: MOVE LAST: why?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes: > I'm suspicios if we should implement scrollable cursors > with the combination of the current MOVE and FETCH implemen- > tation. For example the backwards FETCH operation for group > nodes isn't implemented properly yet(maybe). Yeah, backwards scan is not implemented for quite a large number of plan node types :-(. I am not sure that it is practical to fix them all. I have been toying with the notion of making cursors on complex plans safe for FETCH BACKWARD by sticking a MATERIAL node atop the plan, if the top plan node isn't one that can handle backwards scan. The trouble with this of course is that one of the main things people like to use cursors for is huge result sets, and materializing those is the last thing you want to do :-( regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: