Here's something that's been bothering me for a while... Perhaps this is correct behaviour, but I can't quite see how. This does not happen if I replace the FETCHes by MOVEs.
Here's the reference case: jtv=> begin; BEGIN jtv=> declare c cursor for select * from events; DECLARE CURSOR jtv=> fetch 3 in c; year | event ------+------------------ 2010 | A Space Oddyssey 2010 | Oddyssey Two 2038 | time_t overflow (3 rows) jtv=> move -3 in c; MOVE 2 jtv=> fetch 3 in c; year | event ------+------------------ 2010 | A Space Oddyssey 2010 | Oddyssey Two 2038 | time_t overflow (3 rows) jtv=> end; COMMIT Okay, since that "move -3" claims to have moved only 2 rows backwards, I tried the same but moving backwards by only 2 rows. This gives me the same response for the MOVE, but my cursor evidently doesn't end up in the same place: jtv=> begin; BEGIN jtv=> declare c cursor for select * from events; DECLARE CURSOR jtv=> fetch 3 in c; year | event ------+------------------ 2010 | A Space Oddyssey 2010 | Oddyssey Two 2038 | time_t overflow (3 rows) jtv=> move -2 in c; MOVE 2 jtv=> fetch 3 in c; year | event ------+----------------- 2010 | Oddyssey Two 2038 | time_t overflow 1971 | jtv (3 rows) jtv=> end; COMMIT This makes it a bit hard for me to figure out just how far I moved my cursor backwards! Moving by BACKWARD ALL will give me the same result as moving by -3. Is this behaviour intentional? If not, can it be fixed? Jeroen ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
