Re: [GENERAL] Bug with sequence

From: Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Oliver Elphick <olly(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Bug with sequence
Date: 2002-11-21 02:40:41
Message-ID: 3DDC47A9.4C0BC2DE@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql

Oliver Elphick wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2002-11-20 at 21:35, Robert Treat wrote:
> > On Wed, 2002-11-20 at 03:53, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2002-11-18 at 15:45, Thomas Aichinger wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I recently installed pg 7.2.3 on my linux box and discovered that
> > > > there are some problems with datatype serial and sequence.
> > > >
> > > > 1.) If you create a table with a datatype serial, the corrsponding
> > > > sequence will be created, but if you drop the table the sequence is
> > > > not dropped.
> > >
> > > This is fixed in 7.3
> > >
> >
> > out of curiosity, do you know the logic that implements this fix? I have
> > a couple of tables that use the same sequence; I'm wondering if dropping
> > one of the tables removes the sequence or if I have to drop all tables
> > before the sequence is removed
>
> I just tried it.
>
> I created a sequence using SERIAL when I created a table. I used the
> same sequence for another table by setting a column default to
> nextval(sequence).
>
> I deleted the first table. The sequence was deleted too, leaving the
> default of the second table referring to a non-existent sequence.

This sounds like a serious bug in our behaviour, and not something we'd
like to release.

Specifically in relation to people's existing scripts, and also to
people who are doing dump/restore of specific tables (it'll kill the
sequences that other tables depend on too!)

No real issue with the nicety for newbies, but am very concerned about
the lack of a dependancy check here.

:-/

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

> Could this be a TODO item in 7.4, to add a dependency check when a
> sequence is set as the default without being created at the same time?
>
> --
> Oliver Elphick Oliver(dot)Elphick(at)lfix(dot)co(dot)uk
> Isle of Wight, UK
> http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
> GPG: 1024D/3E1D0C1C: CA12 09E0 E8D5 8870 5839 932A 614D 4C34 3E1D 0C1C
> ========================================
> "If my people, which are called by my name, shall
> humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and
> turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from
> heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal
> their land." II Chronicles 7:14
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Reid Thompson 2002-11-21 03:40:59 is the sqlca.sqlabc value unique for each response type
Previous Message Graham Bartlett 2002-11-21 00:49:28 Where do I finf directions and code to set up replication with postgres

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Wheeler 2002-11-21 03:02:51 Re: DBD::PostgreSQL
Previous Message Henry B. Hotz 2002-11-21 01:22:14 Re: Geometry test on NetBSD (was Re: [HACKERS] RC1?)

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-11-21 03:44:06 Re: [GENERAL] Bug with sequence
Previous Message scott.marlowe 2002-11-21 00:09:34 Re: Closing inactive connections OR user connections limits