Re: MOVE LAST: why? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: MOVE LAST: why?
Date
Msg-id 200301080439.h084dRa21093@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: MOVE LAST: why?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
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,
Pennsylvania19073
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: MOVE LAST: why?
Next
From: Hiroshi Inoue
Date:
Subject: Re: MOVE LAST: why?