Re: Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I still think we shouldn't be hashing this out during beta, but ...

We're looking at ways to fix some bugs. It's never been the case that
our first-resort response to a bug is "pull out features".

> What would the final nextval() behavior be? ::regclass binding? How
> would late binding be done? What syntax?

If I were prepared to say all that today, I would have just done it ;-)

The more I think about it, the more I think that two sets of function
names might not be such an awful idea. next_value(), curr_value(), and
set_value() seem like they'd work well enough. Then we'd just say that
nextval and friends are deprecated except when you need late binding,
and we'd be done.

regards, tom lane