From: | Michael Davis <michael(dot)davis(at)prevuenet(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-sql(at)hub(dot)org |
Subject: | RE: [SQL] Simple Question?? |
Date: | 1999-03-01 18:05:01 |
Message-ID: | 93C04F1F5173D211A27900105AA8FCFC14520E@lambic.prevuenet.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
I would say yes as long as table_b still references the same sequence as
table_a. Sequences are stored and maintained separately from the tables
they are used in. If you drop and recreate a sequence, the starting number
of that sequence will be 1 even though the database using the sequence has
500 records in it. You can reset the value of the sequence (seq_a) to the
highest value currently stored in the database for the column that seq_a is
being used with. When I ported my Access97 table to Postgres, I had to set
the value of each sequence I used to match the highest value stored in my
tables.
-----Original Message-----
From: archiver [SMTP:archiver(at)db(dot)geocrawler(dot)com]
Sent: Saturday, February 27, 1999 3:51 PM
To: pgsql-sql(at)hub(dot)org
Subject: [SQL] Simple Question??
Here's a question that maybe you can answer easily...
If I am using a sequence (seq_a) in table_a
...then "create table_b as select * from table_a"
...does table_b start using that sequence (seq_a), starting at the
point
where table_a left off??
I have a 1GB table that I want to optimize by reordering it, and I
will want
the new table to use the same sequence to generate the primary key.
I will
then drop the original table and rename the table_b to table_a.
Any clues?
Tim Perdue
tim(at)perdue(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | pierre | 1999-03-01 22:08:35 | 6.4.x to 6.5 |
Previous Message | Andru Luvisi | 1999-03-01 07:34:58 | Re: pgsql-sql-digest V1 #155 |