From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Zoltan Boszormenyi <zboszor(at)dunaweb(dot)hu> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, Tino Wildenhain <tino(at)wildenhain(dot)de> |
Subject: | Re: SERIAL type feature request |
Date: | 2005-12-04 21:29:14 |
Message-ID: | 200512042129.jB4LTEi15896@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut ?rta:
>
> >Josh Berkus wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I believe that our SERIAL/SEQUENCE stuff is already in compliance
> >>with the SQL standard for sequences (in SQL03). Why would we change
> >>it?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Because your belief is wrong, but Zoltan's proposal is not getting is
> >closer.
> >
> >
> >
> OK, what does the standard say on SERIAL for specifying the start value?
> And about this:
>
> <last serial value was e.g. 307>
> insert into mytable (serial_id, ...) values (500, ...);
> delete from mytable where serial_id = 500;
>
> In Informix, this is a way to start the next serial value at 501.
This seems much stranger than a simple setval(), which get got from
Oracle.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-12-04 21:49:31 | Re: SERIAL type feature request |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-12-04 21:28:21 | Re: pg_restore [archiver] file offset in dump file is too |