From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Douglas McNaught <doug(at)mcnaught(dot)org> |
Cc: | lists(at)benjamindsmith(dot)com, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: sequence increment jumps? |
Date: | 2007-01-25 19:34:40 |
Message-ID: | 200701251934.l0PJYeD03931@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Douglas McNaught wrote:
> Benjamin Smith <lists(at)benjamindsmith(dot)com> writes:
>
> > On Thursday 25 January 2007 09:53, Douglas McNaught wrote:
> >> Nature of the beast. ?Sequence increments aren't rolled back on
> >> transaction abort (for performance and concurrency reasons), so you
> >> should expect gaps.
> >
> > Behavior long ago noted and accounted for. But I've always wondered why this
> > was so? Is there a specific reason for this behavior?
>
> Being able to roll back a sequence increment would require locking the
> sequence for the duration of the transaction, which would kill
> concurrency.
This is an FAQ.
--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tommy Gildseth | 2007-01-25 19:37:30 | Re: Problem with result ordering |
Previous Message | Michael Artz | 2007-01-25 19:28:38 | encode, lower and 0x8a |