I am not adding anything from this thread to the patches_hold queue or
the TODO list, right? We are just going to wait to get reports from the
field?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> > I don't see that in the spec.
>
> > It does say that "if <updatability clause> is not specified, then if
> > either INSENSITIVE, SCROLL, or ORDER BY is specified, or if QE is not a
> > simply updatable table, then an <updatability clause> of READ ONLY is
> > implicit". It also says "If an <updatability clause> of FOR UPDATE with
> > or without a <column name list> is specified, then INSENSITIVE shall not
> > be specified". But I don't see anything forbidding SCROLL FOR UPDATE
> > combination.
>
> SQL92 has this under Leveling Rules:
>
> 1) The following restrictions apply for Intermediate SQL:
>
> a) A <declare cursor> shall not specify INSENSITIVE.
>
> b) If an <updatability clause> of FOR UPDATE with or without
> a <column name list> is specified, then neither SCROLL nor
> ORDER BY shall be specified.
>
> So SCROLL with FOR UPDATE is a Full-SQL-only feature. (In SQL99 it's
> broken out as Feature F831-01, but that doesn't tell you much about
> how hard it is or whether most implementations have it.)
>
> I don't feel particularly bad about not supporting every such feature.
> I think Simon's recommendation is definitely the way to go for 8.3 ---
> if anyone is motivated to relax the restriction in the future, they can
> figure out how to resolve the corner cases then.
>
> Since we're trying to pull things together for beta2 on Friday, I'll go
> make this happen now.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://postgres.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +