Re: <sequence_name>.sequence_name != <sequence_name>?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: <sequence_name>.sequence_name != <sequence_name>?
Date: 2003-04-04 17:24:12
Message-ID: 7590.1049477052@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Ed L." <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net> writes:
> When a sequence is created in 7.3.2, it appears you get a new table for each
> sequence object. Is it ever possible for the sequence_name in a sequence
> relation not to match the name of the relation itself?

ALTER TABLE RENAME on a sequence doesn't update the sequence_name.

I think someone looked at doing that update, but we concluded it was too
messy (mainly because ALTER RENAME is transactional but updates to a
sequence tuple aren't).

In general I'd counsel that you should ignore the sequence_name field
anyway. It's vestigial.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2003-04-04 17:37:34 Re: [PERFORM] OSS database needed for testing
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-04-04 17:19:49 Re: more contrib: log rotator