Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> There is *no* credible use case for this (hint: MOVE FORWARD/BACKWARD
> >> ALL does not need this to work for >2G tables).
>
> > Already done because of bad coding. You want the TODO item removed too?
>
> As I s
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> There is *no* credible use case for this (hint: MOVE FORWARD/BACKWARD
>> ALL does not need this to work for >2G tables).
> Already done because of bad coding. You want the TODO item removed too?
As I said, I see no use case for it.
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> This patch has broken half the buildfarm, and I've still not seen a
> >> rationale why we need to make such a change at all.
>
> > Fixed with attached patch. The use case for this was not FETCH, but
> > MOVE for > 2gig tables.
>
>
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> This patch has broken half the buildfarm, and I've still not seen a
>> rationale why we need to make such a change at all.
> Fixed with attached patch. The use case for this was not FETCH, but
> MOVE for > 2gig tables.
There is *no* credible use case
