Re: Bug #866 related problem (ATTN Tom Lane)
От | Florian Wunderlich |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bug #866 related problem (ATTN Tom Lane) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3E48B6C8.A36E5A92@hq.factor3.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Bug #866 related problem (ATTN Tom Lane)
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
I can't get through to you because your spam filter blocks my SMTP relay. 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 that. I found another posting which I guess you mean (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-novice/2002-12/msg00222.php). 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? Thanks, Florian Wunderlich
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: