| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems |
| Date: | 2005-10-01 15:55:12 |
| Message-ID: | 8731.1128182112@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> Well, AFAICT, the only part of the spec we cannot implement is what you
> quote above. Therefore, why can't we support NEXT VALUE FOR seqname and
> reject table creation/alteration which would add more than one reference
> to the same sequence.
And how are you going to determine whether a query (not a table
definition) contains more than one NEXT VALUE FOR the same sequence?
Bear in mind some of them could be hidden down inside views or
functions.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2005-10-01 15:57:27 | Re: effective SELECT from child tables |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-01 15:44:15 | Re: [HACKERS] A Better External Sort? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-01 16:01:29 | Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-01 15:28:08 | Re: Making pgxs builds work with a relocated installation |