Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> That would solve the problem with two updates of the same row, but not this:
> UPDATE .. WHERE CURRENT OF...
> FETCH RELATIVE 0
> At the moment, that returns the next row, not the one that was updated.
> Same problem with FETCH NEXT + FETCH PRIOR after the UPDATE.
Hmm, what I'm seeing is that it returns the original (unmodified) row;
is that what you meant to say?
> What does the SQL standard have to say about this?
I think it's OK, or at worst an unimplemented feature, since our cursors
are always INSENSITIVE.
regards, tom lane