On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:23 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> More generally, what would you hope to accomplish with such a construct >>> that wouldn't be better done by writing the cursor's underlying query >>> directly in the WITH clause? > >> Maybe I'm stupid today, but it seems like the obvious use case would >> be fetching some but not all rows from the cursor? > > And how many rows would that be? As I said, the proposed syntax leaves > it completely unclear how many rows get fetched or what the ending cursor > position is; but especially so if you want the answer to be something > other than "all/the end".
/me is bemused. The existing syntax for FETCH already includes a way to specify the number of rows you want to fetch, as in this example from the documentation: FETCH FORWARD 5 FROM liahona; Why wouldn't that work here too? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
