Re: actualised forgotten Magnus's patch for plpgsql MOVE statement
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: actualised forgotten Magnus's patch for plpgsql MOVE statement |
Дата | |
Msg-id | BAY114-F379239811AE131D4B5285F94D0@phx.gbl обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: actualised forgotten Magnus's patch for plpgsql MOVE statement (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: actualised forgotten Magnus's patch for plpgsql
MOVE statement
Re: actualised forgotten Magnus's patch for plpgsql MOVE statement Re: actualised forgotten Magnus's patch for plpgsql MOVE statement |
Список | pgsql-patches |
>I would argue that we should likewise not allow them in plpgsql's MOVE, >although this is more of a judgment call than is the case for FETCH. >I just don't think it's a good idea to provide two redundant ways to do >the same thing, when we might want to make one of the ways mean >something else later. There's no upside and there might be a downside. > It's question. There are lot of links to FETCH in doc, and we support from FETCH direction only subset. It needs at least notice in documentation. When I testeid MOVE I found an form MOVE FORWARD 10 ... more natural than MOVE RELATIVE 10 and if we support MOVE FORWARD ... then is logic support MOVE FORWARD n , else FORWARD, BACKWARD are nonstandard and MOVE statement too. Regards Pavel Stehule _________________________________________________________________ Citite se osamele? Poznejte nekoho vyjmecneho diky Match.com. http://www.msn.cz/
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: