Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>
> > The question here is do we want to offer a half-baked solution,
> > recognizing that it's some improvement over no solution at all?
> > Or do we feel it doesn't meet our standards?
>
> My question is how would you do this if you need this
> functionality and you don't have WITH HOLD cursors?
ODBC(maybe JDBC also) has cross-transaction result sets
(rather than cursors) since long by simply holding all
results for a query at client side.
Why are cursors outside transactions expected eagerly ?
Because it's very hard (almost impossible) for clients
to provide a functionality to edit(display/scroll/updateetc) large result sets effectively.
I don't object to a half-baked solution if there's a
prospect of a real solution. However, I've never seen
it and I have little time to investigate it unfortunately.
regards,
Hiroshi Inouehttp://www.geocities.jp/inocchichichi/psqlodbc/
