From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Erwin Moller <erwin(at)darwine(dot)nl>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Sequences change in a rolled-back transactions |
Date: | 2009-03-09 15:44:55 |
Message-ID: | 49B53977.2070706@postnewspapers.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Erwin Moller wrote:
>
>> I thought a transaction that is rolled back, rolls back *everything*
>> done in that transaction.
>> Appearantly sequences are not included.
>
> Yes. This is actually a desirable property, because it allows sequences
> to work fine in concurrent scenarios (which are, after all, the whole
> point of sequences).
>
> If you actually need an incremental number with no gaps (which is rare
> but not unseen), you need to use some other mechanism, which will
> probably involve a lock to prevent concurrency.
If so, search the list archives for "gapless sequence". You'll see lots
of explanations of options and of the problems with them.
--
Craig Ringer
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | George Oakman | 2009-03-09 16:38:37 | C++ User-defined functions |
Previous Message | Erwin Moller | 2009-03-09 15:40:14 | Re: Sequences change in a rolled-back transactions |