RE: Large selects handled inefficiently?

> A cursor is another slightly foolish SQL hack.
>
> A query language specifies the syntax of queries ('SELECT ...').  It
> doesn't specify the manner in which these are actually returned.  It
> seems totally within the bounds of the remit of a decent client-side
> library (and a decent back-end) to realise that in practice a client
> will want some control over the speed with which rows are returned.
>
> Whilst explicit cursors are needed for some (IMO ugly) procedural SQL
> code, explicit cursors should not be necessary for the simple (and
> common) task of carrying out a SELECT which takes up more memory than
> you wish to have available at any single time.


Hmm, I agree.  So, does the PostgreSQL protocol support some form of non-SQL
cursor?


- Andrew