"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Mike Aubury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> ie - under postgresql it appears we've scrolled *past* the last row and need >> an additional fetch to get back to our last row.. > > Why do you find that surprising? It seems to me to be symmetrical with > the case at the beginning of the table --- the cursor is initially > positioned before the first row. Why shouldn't there be a corresponding > state where it's positioned after the last row?
What's implied by that but perhaps not clear is that it's easier to think of cursors as being *between* rows rather than *on* rows. I'm not sure the standard entirely adopts that model however. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
