2013-11-29 04:56 keltezéssel, Peter Eisentraut írta:
On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 18:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Hm. So you're suggesting that ECPG fix this problem by inserting an
explicit NO SCROLL clause into translated DECLARE CURSOR commands, if
there's not a SCROLL clause?
I wouldn't go that far
On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 18:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hm. So you're suggesting that ECPG fix this problem by inserting an
> explicit NO SCROLL clause into translated DECLARE CURSOR commands, if
> there's not a SCROLL clause?
I wouldn't go that far yet.
Do I understand this right that the future r
2013-11-28 09:55 keltezéssel, Michael Meskes írta:
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 09:04:17AM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
Well, technically, unspecified means NO SCROLL according to the SQL
standard. A lot of applications in ECPG are ported from other systems,
That means by automatically adding a
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 09:04:17AM +0100, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
> >>Well, technically, unspecified means NO SCROLL according to the SQL
> >>standard. A lot of applications in ECPG are ported from other systems,
That means by automatically adding a literal NO SCROLL to the command we obey
stan
2013-11-28 00:17 keltezéssel, Tom Lane írta:
Peter Eisentraut writes:
On 11/27/13, 3:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Given these considerations, I think it'd be better to allow explicit
application control over whether read-ahead happens for a particular
query. And I have no problem whatsoever with re
2013-11-27 20:49 keltezéssel, Alvaro Herrera írta:
Boszormenyi Zoltan escribió:
If you consider all these:
- certain combinations of query and DECLARE stmt flags fail;
- adding NO SCROLL is breaking backward compatibility;
- the readahead code has to really know whether the cursor is
scroll
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On 11/27/13, 3:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Given these considerations, I think it'd be better to allow explicit
>> application control over whether read-ahead happens for a particular
>> query. And I have no problem whatsoever with requiring that the cursor
>> be explicit
On 11/27/13, 3:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Given these considerations, I think it'd be better to allow explicit
> application control over whether read-ahead happens for a particular
> query. And I have no problem whatsoever with requiring that the cursor
> be explicitly marked SCROLL or NO SCROLL be
On 11/27/13, 2:49 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Would it work to have a function of some sort to which you give a cursor
> name and it returns whether it is scrollable or not?
That might make sense. I think this case is similar to the question
whether a view is updatable. You wouldn't put that inf
Boszormenyi Zoltan writes:
> If you consider all these:
> - certain combinations of query and DECLARE stmt flags fail;
> - adding NO SCROLL is breaking backward compatibility;
> - the readahead code has to really know whether the cursor is
>scrollable so it can behave just like the server;
I
Boszormenyi Zoltan escribió:
> If you consider all these:
>
> - certain combinations of query and DECLARE stmt flags fail;
> - adding NO SCROLL is breaking backward compatibility;
> - the readahead code has to really know whether the cursor is
> scrollable so it can behave just like the server;
2013-11-27 19:16 keltezéssel, Tom Lane írta:
Boszormenyi Zoltan writes:
2013-11-23 22:01 keltezéssel, Tom Lane írta:
Boszormenyi Zoltan writes:
Attached is the patch that modified the command tag returned by
the DECLARE CURSOR command. It returns "DECLARE SCROLL CURSOR"
or "DECLARE NO SCROLL
Boszormenyi Zoltan writes:
> 2013-11-23 22:01 keltezéssel, Tom Lane írta:
>> Boszormenyi Zoltan writes:
>>> Attached is the patch that modified the command tag returned by
>>> the DECLARE CURSOR command. It returns "DECLARE SCROLL CURSOR"
>>> or "DECLARE NO SCROLL CURSOR" depending on the cursor'
2013-11-23 22:01 keltezéssel, Tom Lane írta:
Boszormenyi Zoltan writes:
Attached is the patch that modified the command tag returned by
the DECLARE CURSOR command. It returns "DECLARE SCROLL CURSOR"
or "DECLARE NO SCROLL CURSOR" depending on the cursor's
scrollable flag that can be determined i
Boszormenyi Zoltan writes:
> Attached is the patch that modified the command tag returned by
> the DECLARE CURSOR command. It returns "DECLARE SCROLL CURSOR"
> or "DECLARE NO SCROLL CURSOR" depending on the cursor's
> scrollable flag that can be determined internally even if neither is
> asked exp
15 matches
Mail list logo
