| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kenneth Tilton <ktilton(at)mcna(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: possible race condition in trigger functions on insert operations? |
| Date: | 2011-11-22 20:52:26 |
| Message-ID: | CAHyXU0wEb_By9MZaoaCUHWiUXwUutMFqCzC7=dq0_26uk6YqiA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:43 PM, David Johnston <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
> Just create a single sequence for each year and then call the proper one
> on-the-fly. You can create multiple sequences in advance and possible even
> auto-create the sequence the first time one is attempted to be used in a
> given year. If you can live with possible (but probably unlikely) gaps in
> the sequence then all the concurrency will be handled for you and you can
> focus on writing a function that, given a year, will return the proper
> value.
I personally think the 'record the next to be inserted value' in a
table somewhere is better unless you are trying to support a lot of
concurrent operations. Also the gap issue is more likely to come up
than you're letting on -- a rolled back transaction is all it takes.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kenneth Tilton | 2011-11-22 20:54:14 | Re: possible race condition in trigger functions on insert operations? |
| Previous Message | David Johnston | 2011-11-22 20:43:15 | Re: possible race condition in trigger functions on insert operations? |