| From: | pabloa98 <pabloa98(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Peter J(dot) Holzer" <hjp-pgsql(at)hjp(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Could postgres12 support millions of sequences? (like 10 million) |
| Date: | 2020-03-21 20:45:54 |
| Message-ID: | CAEjudX7xNi-YjkkmN4Gy5dTVFBX05ak87iFcD48M0PzF_WrDZw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 12:08 PM Peter J. Holzer <hjp-pgsql(at)hjp(dot)at> wrote:
>
>
> And I think that "care about gaps -> sequence doesn't work" is a
> knee-jerk reaction. It's similar to "can't parse HTML with regexps".
> True in the general case, and therefore people tend to blurt it out
> every time the topic comes up. But not necessarily true in specific
> cases. As I wrote above, there is no perfect solution - so you have to
> think about the actual requirements and the consequences of various
> solutions - and maybe using a sequence is the best (or least bad)
> solution.
>
>
OK. In that case, I will proceed with the millions of sequences. We will
see.
Anyway, It will be awesome if we have a sequence data type in a future
version of postgresql. They will solve a lot of problems similar to this
one.
Pablo
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeremy Smith | 2020-03-21 20:50:15 | Re: Explain says 8 workers planned, only 1 executed |
| Previous Message | Peter J. Holzer | 2020-03-21 19:13:36 | Re: Could postgres12 support millions of sequences? (like 10 million) |