From: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Gregory Wood <gregw(at)com-stock(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Re: Suggested improvement : Adjust SEQUENCES to accept an INCREMENT of functionname(parameters) instead of an integer |
Date: | 2001-06-28 18:17:50 |
Message-ID: | 200106281817.f5SIHoH25460@jupiter.us.greatbridge.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Gregory Wood wrote:
> I'm usually Mr. Features, but I don't see a whole lot of value in this one.
> I've tried to come up with a scenario that this might be useful and they're
> all contrived examples that could probably be best handled by creating my
> own system rather than forcing the functionality into the existing
> mechanism. Unless a special case were made for this type of SEQUENCE, I
> imagine that this would drastically slow them down as a whole.
>
> I'd much rather see int8 SEQUENCEs than a change in increment amounts.
I totally agree on that. IMHO a second column containing a
random number as kinda key serves alot better anyway, if you
just want to make it unguessable.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Patrick Welche | 2001-06-28 18:22:49 | Re: Repeated messages (was Re: Suggested improvement : Adjust SEQUENCES) |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-06-28 18:00:03 | Re: Repeated messages (was Re: Suggested improvement : Adjust SEQUENCES) |