| From: | Bjørn T Johansen <btj(at)havleik(dot)no> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: select/update performance? |
| Date: | 2003-11-05 09:49:17 |
| Message-ID: | 1068025757.12114.22.camel@pgsqlsrv.havleik.no |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Yes, but the table in question have 3 PK and only one that needs this
"sequence" so I just thought instead of getting holes in the IDs I just
manually handle this counter somehow.. Not a big deal but... :)
BTJ
On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 10:42, Rob Fielding wrote:
> Bjørn T Johansen wrote:
> > I need to maintain a manually counter for an id-field, but I can do this
> > two ways. Either make a counter table (which means one select and one
> > update) or just selecting the largest id from existing table and
> > increment by one (just one select + one table lock). Which one is
> > fastest?
>
> Is would be better to create a SEQUENCE and simply call nextval on it.
> Then you are assured that you'll get a unique sequence when working in a
> concurrent environment.
>
> It would also be guaranteed faster than interrogating tables.
>
> Hope this helps,
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Clive Page | 2003-11-05 10:02:10 | Re: How to use dblink within pl/pgsql function: |
| Previous Message | Rob Fielding | 2003-11-05 09:42:26 | Re: select/update performance? |