Re: Proposed TODO: fetch->INT8 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Proposed TODO: fetch->INT8
Date
Msg-id 200502010456.j114ucC29478@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposed TODO: fetch->INT8  ("Merlin Moncure" <merlin.moncure@rcsonline.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Jeff wrote:
> > Is there a practical use for retrieving > 2^31 records at once?
> > 
> > (this is a serious question, I'm not arguing that it should cause a
> > syntax error)
> > 
> > Regards,
> >     Jeff Davis
> > 
> > On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 14:13 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > > I was browsing the TODO list and I noticed the todo to bump
> limit/offset
> > > to int8.  IMO, the flavors of fetch that take a numeric parameter
> need
> > > this as well.
> > >
> > > FWIW, trying to pass integer > 2^31 to fetch gives a syntax error,
> which
> > > is clearly wrong.
> 
> No, but don't forget about relative positioning:
> fetch relative c from huge_cursor;

TODO updated:
* Change LIMIT/OFFSET and FETCH/MOVE to use int8

--  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: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Some things I like to pick from the TODO list ...
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [NOVICE] Last ID Problem