Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Refresh my memory: what is the point of inventing an additional LAST
> >> keyword, when the behavior is exactly the same as MOVE ALL ?
> > SQL compatibility, per Peter.
> Oh, I see.  But then really it should be documented as a FETCH keyword,
> not only a MOVE keyword.  Will fix.

IIRC *FETCH LAST* doesn't mean *FETCH ALL*.

In addition *FETCH 0* seems to be changed to mean
*FETCH RELATIVE 0* currently. Is it reasonable ? 
*FETCH n* never means *FETCH RELATIVE n*.

Hiroshi Inoue

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to