From: Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>
To: josh@agliodbs.com
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: FAST PostgreSQL <fastpgs@fast.fujitsu.com.au>
Subject: Re: Updatable cursor doubt
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 02:12:40 +0100
Message-ID: <877in56hkn.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200709041737.09541.josh@agliodbs.com>
References: <46DCB86F.9070102@fast.fujitsu.com.au>
<46DD226F.7060602@enterprisedb.com>
<200709041737.09541.josh@agliodbs.com>
"Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> Who are we, MySQL? We ought not to accept the syntax if we're not going
> to enforce it.
I think the thinking is that the syntax doesn't promise anything about
enforcing any restrictions. It's a method for the user to declare what
features he needs. Ie, without that clause (or with a FOR UPDATE?) the
database should signal an error in cases where the cursor won't handle
updates. But with that clause the user is telling us that he's ok with
not being able to update the cursor.
Perhaps a better way to think about this case is "should you raise an
error if someone opens a file in read-only mode when they actually do
have write permission?"
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: stark@enterprisedb.com, josh@agliodbs.com, heikki@enterprisedb.com, fastpgs@fast.fujitsu.com.au
Subject: Re: Updatable cursor doubt
In-Reply-To: <877in56hkn.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox