Re: SERIAL Field

From: "Joel Burton" <joel(at)joelburton(dot)com>
To: <dan(at)langille(dot)org>
Cc: <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SERIAL Field
Date: 2002-05-06 16:43:24
Message-ID: JGEPJNMCKODMDHGOBKDNOEPLCMAA.joel@joelburton.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Langille [mailto:dan(at)langille(dot)org]
> Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 12:41 PM
> To: Joel Burton
> Cc: pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [ADMIN] SERIAL Field
>
> > In any event, inserting then using currval() is the standard practice
> > around here, and it works great. Nothing fishy at all here,
> nothing to see,
> > move on.
>
> Why is that "less risk"?

It's not; nextval() is just fine. I was half asleep and thinking, I think,
of another database when I wrote that.

"You say nextval() + write, I say write + currval()..."

J.

Joel BURTON | joel(at)joelburton(dot)com | joelburton.com | aim: wjoelburton
Knowledge Management & Technology Consultant

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dan Langille 2002-05-06 18:25:21 Re: SERIAL Field
Previous Message Dan Langille 2002-05-06 16:41:24 Re: SERIAL Field