From: | Oscar Tuscon <obtuse(at)bmwe30(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Sequence question |
Date: | 2004-08-04 23:20:18 |
Message-ID: | 20040804232018.DD88F394A@sitemail.everyone.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
I'm looking at ways to get batches of sequence values s faster. I don't want to set cache or increment to a large number for a variety of reasons. I need to grab id's in batches of varying numbers at various times, from 1 to several thousand at once.
Doing it 1 at a time works, but more time goes into it than I'd like. I tried setting cache_value high but the database roundtrips were eating more time that I wanted to see; I only saw a 25% improvement in average time.
SO... is the following approach safe? That is, will this be atomic, or is there a possibility that another connection could squeeze in a select nextval() between the select nextval() and the setval below?
If it's safe I'd do this and take the sequences as the new currval - #I asked for (1500 or whatever).
mydb=# select setval('my_id_seq', (select nextval('my_id_seq')+1500));
Thanks
Oscar T
_____________________________________________________________
The BMW E30 community on the web---> http://www.bmwe30.net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Harrison | 2004-08-04 23:25:31 | most idiomatic way to "update or insert"? |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2004-08-04 22:41:10 | Re: enforcing a join type |