Re: pg_dump future problem.

Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> At 09:45 AM 5/05/2003 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> This would fail to cover the case where the user has used setval() to
>> set is_called false and last_value to something other than minv.

> In this case I think they have shot themselves in the foot; the docs
> clearly state that setval/3 is for internal pg_dump use only.

There is no such statement visible in
http://www.ca.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/7.3/postgres/functions-sequence.html
nor do I find it anywhere else in the current documents.

> It is also
> not to be relied upon when there are more than one connection to the db
> updating the sequence.

Any more or less so than either two-parameter SETVAL or the proposed
ALTER TABLE? I don't see how.

> I am not attached to my solution, but I do think
> it's a good idea to look at what would have been done with a 'green fields'
> design, and then ask: can we do it now? Is it worth it?

It probably would look different if we were starting from scratch
... but we aren't, and I don't see any problems here that are large
enough to justify starting over.

regards, tom lane