From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: MOVE LAST: why?
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2003 23:39:27 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <200301080439.h084dRa21093@candle.pha.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <27934.1041984327@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> 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.
Yes. SQL standard doesn't have move, but it has FETCH LAST, so we
borrowed it for MOVE.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
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-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: MOVE LAST: why?
In-Reply-To: <200301080439.h084dRa21093@candle.pha.pa.us>
* 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