Re: Bug #866 related problem (ATTN Tom Lane)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
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)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
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:

Предыдущее
От: Tim Burgess
Дата:
Сообщение: 'update' as action of 'insert' rule: permission denied
Следующее
От: Vicki Brown
Дата:
Сообщение: discrepancy between "make check" output and documentation