| From: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Burr, Colin" <CBurr(at)herald(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "'pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bug: Sequence generator insert |
| Date: | 2003-11-28 21:38:28 |
| Message-ID: | 20031128213828.GA24904@wolff.to |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 18:37:41 -0500,
"Burr, Colin" <CBurr(at)herald(dot)com> wrote:
>
> However, even though the new record failed to be inserted into the table,
> the sequence generator was still updated.
>
> The sequence generator should only be updated if the record is successfully
> inserted into the table, and should not be updated if the insert fails.
That isn't how sequences work. If you need a sequence of numbers without
gaps then you need to use something else. Note that the something else
will need to have a way to let only one transaction at a time update
the counter which may be a performance problem.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-11-28 21:57:18 | Re: explicit joins wrong planning |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-11-28 21:04:28 | Re: rules and return values question |