Jim C. Nasby wrote: > On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 11:32:02AM -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > I think the point that Martijn was trying to make was that per our docs > > it would be perfectly acceptable for us to make any cursor NO SCROLL > > implicitly if it means less work for the optimizer. > > Ok, I take that back. The actual quote[1] is: > > "Depending upon the complexity of the query's execution plan, specifying > SCROLL may impose a performance penalty on the query's execution time." > > Clearly that says it can affect execution time, not that we're free to > alter the default behavior at will. > > But speaking of documentation, it doesn't actually say what the default > is. Care update that, or should I formally submit a patch?
Patch please. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
