Jeff wrote:
> Is there a practical use for retrieving > 2^31 records at once?
>
> (this is a serious question, I'm not arguing that it should cause a
> syntax error)
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
>
> On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 14:13 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > I was browsing the TODO list and I noticed the todo to bump
limit/offset
> > to int8. IMO, the flavors of fetch that take a numeric parameter
need
> > this as well.
> >
> > FWIW, trying to pass integer > 2^31 to fetch gives a syntax error,
which
> > is clearly wrong.

No, but don't forget about relative positioning:
fetch relative c from huge_cursor;

Could make a reasonable case for that.
Merlin

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match

Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Jeff wrote:
> > Is there a practical use for retrieving > 2^31 records at once?
> >
> > (this is a serious question, I'm not arguing that it should cause a
> > syntax error)
> >
> > Regards,
> > Jeff Davis
> >
> > On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 14:13 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > > I was browsing the TODO list and I noticed the todo to bump
> limit/offset
> > > to int8. IMO, the flavors of fetch that take a numeric parameter
> need
> > > this as well.
> > >
> > > FWIW, trying to pass integer > 2^31 to fetch gives a syntax error,
> which
> > > is clearly wrong.
>
> No, but don't forget about relative positioning:
> fetch relative c from huge_cursor;

TODO updated:

* Change LIMIT/OFFSET and FETCH/MOVE to use int8

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend