Re: pg_dump future problem.

From: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_dump future problem.
Date: 2003-05-05 15:50:06
Message-ID: 5.1.0.14.0.20030506013859.02ab2750@mail.rhyme.com.au
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 11:22 AM 5/05/2003 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>But the proposed "nicer interface" *introduces* a bug, namely the
>inability to preserve is_called, which is exactly the pg_dump bug
>that 3-parameter setval was invented to fix.

No, I don't want to remove the setval functions from general sequences. I
just want to use existing restrictions on the SERIAL data type: by
definition they start at 0, increase by 1, and are intX. We can ignore the
current is_called flag and set the min value or is_called flag in such a
way as to get the desired next value.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 03 5330 3172 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephan Szabo 2003-05-05 16:07:18 Re: Why are triggers semi-deferred?
Previous Message Philip Warner 2003-05-05 15:35:56 Re: Why are triggers semi-deferred?