| From: | "Joe Conway" <joseph(dot)conway(at)home(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | <srn(at)commsecure(dot)com(dot)au>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Serial not so unique? |
| Date: | 2001-08-18 13:17:17 |
| Message-ID: | 007401c127e8$1ab351e0$0705a8c0@jecw2k1 |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Sometimes (about 20%, it seems) with several of the data sets, we
> get an error trying to insert rows into the table with the serial in it.
> On investigation, it seems that the serial number has got to 101, then
> set itself back to 4, causing nextval to return 5, and there are already
> entries from 1-101.
>
> Now, we use the serial as the primary key, and we never explicitly set it.
>
> Has anyone seen anything like this? I can work around it by generating
> a serial number within the application, but that's not ideal.
Odd problem. What do you get if you run:
select * from name_of_this_troublesome_sequence;
particularly for increment_by, max_value, min_value, and is_cycled?
-- Joe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-08-18 14:40:33 | Re: Serial not so unique? |
| Previous Message | Stephen Robert Norris | 2001-08-18 05:55:28 | Serial not so unique? |