Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mcnc!decvax!decwrl!sun!imagen!atari!portal!cup.portal.com!truett
From: truett@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: Informix query
Message-ID: <2414@cup.portal.com>
Date: 12 Jan 88 08:57:02 GMT
References: <3890001@hpcmmb.HP.COM> <3216@ihlpf.ATT.COM> <2318@cup.portal.com> <67@coot.AUSTIN.LOCKHEED.COM> <29074UH2@PSUVM>
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 13
XPortal-User-Id: 1.1001.2190

It turns out that in order to solve the problem, a single cursor is needed.
The cursor is defined for a SELECT . . . FOR UPDATE OF . . . and then the
UPDATE . . . is performed using the qualifier CURRENT OF "cursorname".  The
looping action within which the FETCH is performed sems to differ according
to the particular implementation of SQL involved.  Of course, it may be that
using the FOR UPDATE OF and CURRENT OF constructs with a cursor ties the two
operations together so that everything works without an explicit looping type
of syntax.  That would seem to be more in the spirit of "nonprocedural"
languages.  (I will defer the diatribe about how sleazy the term "non-
procedural" is.  :-))

Truett Lee Smith, Sunnyvale, CA
UUCP:  truett@cup.portal.com