Re: sql question
In article <45l3i2$46t@cssun.mathcs.emory.edu>, Mark.Denham@bbc.co.uk says... > > >followed by 49 FETCH PREVIOUS calls..... > >More reliable way to do it don't you think? > What about FETCH RELATIVE, Mark ?
In article <45l3i2$46t@cssun.mathcs.emory.edu>, Mark.Denham@bbc.co.uk says... > > >followed by 49 FETCH PREVIOUS calls..... > >More reliable way to do it don't you think? > What about FETCH RELATIVE, Mark ?