Re: MOVE LAST: why?

Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Refresh my memory: what is the point of inventing an additional LAST
> >> keyword, when the behavior is exactly the same as MOVE ALL ?
> 
> > SQL compatibility, per Peter.
> 
> Oh, I see.  But then really it should be documented as a FETCH keyword,
> not only a MOVE keyword.  Will fix.

IIRC *FETCH LAST* doesn't mean *FETCH ALL*.

In addition *FETCH 0* seems to be changed to mean
*FETCH RELATIVE 0* currently. Is it reasonable ? 
*FETCH n* never means *FETCH RELATIVE n*.

regards,
Hiroshi Inouehttp://w2422.nsk.ne.jp/~inoue/