Pavel Stehule wrote: > > >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.
Do we have a patch to make this consistent? -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
