Added to TODO for pl/pgsql: o Review handling of MOVE and FETCH
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-04/msg00527.php --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. > > Regards > Pavel Stehule > > _________________________________________________________________ > Citite se osamele? Poznejte nekoho vyjmecneho diky Match.com. > http://www.msn.cz/ > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
