Re: [HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-13 Thread James William Pye
On Jun 13, 2008, at 4:40 PM, Kris Jurka wrote: The JDBC driver would also like this ability, but a GUC is a pretty ugly hack. I completely agree that it is an ugly hack. :) Also, since you still have to go to the SQL level to issue the MOVE or FETCH BACKWARD, you're still not all the way t

Re: [HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-13 Thread Kris Jurka
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, James William Pye wrote: My thoughts for creating a HOLD and/or SCROLL cursor on Bind would be to add YA GUC stating the cursor options for Bind cursors. Something along the lines of "default_bind_options=HOLD,SCROLL". 2. I'm the only one asking/looking for it. (I'm so

Re: [HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-13 Thread James William Pye
On Jun 13, 2008, at 9:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote: You'd do it while Binding a FETCH command. Indeed, that is true. It seems quite unfortunate that drivers have to jump through such hoops to provide a convenient programmer's interface to held and/or scrollable cursors; bearing in mind all that has be

Re: [HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-13 Thread Tom Lane
James William Pye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Huh? I don't see why... you might have such a limitation in a >> particular driver, but not in the protocol. > Oh? I know when you bind a prepared statement you have the ability > state the formats of

Re: [HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-12 Thread James William Pye
On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Huh? I don't see why... you might have such a limitation in a particular driver, but not in the protocol. Oh? I know when you bind a prepared statement you have the ability state the formats of each column, but I'm not aware of the protocol's capaci

Re: [HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-12 Thread Tom Lane
James William Pye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Indeed, but like I said in my initial e-mail:: > I know you can use DECLARE, but I believe that this inhibits the > driver from being able to select the transfer format for individual > columns; it's all binary or it's all text. Huh? I

Re: [HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-12 Thread James William Pye
On Jun 12, 2008, at 3:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Sure, but if you're willing to use a SQL-level operation on the portal then you could perfectly well declare the cursor at SQL level too. Indeed, but like I said in my initial e-mail:: I know you can use DECLARE, but I believe that this inhibits

Re: [HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-12 Thread Tom Lane
James William Pye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Jun 12, 2008, at 10:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> James William Pye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> Is there anyway to bind a cursor with SCROLL and WITH HOLD at the >>> protocol level? >> >> No, and for at least the first of those I don't see the poi

Re: [HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-12 Thread James William Pye
On Jun 12, 2008, at 10:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote: James William Pye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Is there anyway to bind a cursor with SCROLL and WITH HOLD at the protocol level? No, and for at least the first of those I don't see the point, since the protocol doesn't offer any behavior other than

Re: [HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-12 Thread Tom Lane
James William Pye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there anyway to bind a cursor with SCROLL and WITH HOLD at the > protocol level? No, and for at least the first of those I don't see the point, since the protocol doesn't offer any behavior other than forward fetch. rega

[HACKERS] Options for protocol level cursors

2008-06-12 Thread James William Pye
Is there anyway to bind a cursor with SCROLL and WITH HOLD at the protocol level? Or perhaps configuring it so after binding it? I know you can use DECLARE, but I believe that this inhibits the driver from being able to select the transfer format for individual columns; it's all binary or i