Re: <sequence_name>.sequence_name != <sequence_name>?

On Friday April 4 2003 10:24, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Ed L." <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net> writes:
> > When a sequence is created in 7.3.2, it appears you get a new table for
> > each sequence object. Is it ever possible for the sequence_name in a
> > sequence relation not to match the name of the relation itself?
>
> In general I'd counsel that you should ignore the sequence_name field
> anyway. It's vestigial.

A related question: Is there a single generalized SQL query which can yield
the set of (sequence_name, last_value) pairs for all sequence objects? The
fact that each sequence is its own relation seems to block that, and the
query constructed from grabbing sequence names from pg_class gets quite
long for more than just a few sequence objects...

Ed