Re: Last ID

From: "Brett W(dot) McCoy" <bmccoy(at)chapelperilous(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Catalin CIOCOIU <catalin(dot)ciocoiu(at)inpg(dot)fr>, "pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Last ID
Date: 2001-03-02 18:23:45
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0103021315290.22539-100000@chapelperilous.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-novice

On Fri, 2 Mar 2001, Tom Lane wrote:

> Quite a few people don't seem to understand how currval() and nextval()
> work.
>
> 1. nextval() advances the sequence object, generating a new value that
> will not be the same as any other nextval() call returns, in either
> this backend or any other one.
>
> 2. currval() gives the last value generated by a nextval() *IN THIS
> BACKEND*. It is undefined until the current backend has done at
> least one nextval() on the sequence object.
>
> There is no "multiuser risk" from either one: in particular, currval()
> will give you the value you last generated, regardless of what other
> backends may be doing.

How ironic... I got into an argument not too long ago with someone on the
Perl-DBI list who insisted that currval could not be reliably used in a
multi-user environment and I argued what you say above. I eventually
conceded the argument, but am glad to know that I was right all along.
But now I feel bad for passing on wrong information...

-- Brett
http://www.chapelperilous.net/~bmccoy/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The chain which can be yanked is not the eternal chain."
-- G. Fitch

In response to

Browse pgsql-novice by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chuck Kimber 2001-03-02 18:33:58 RE: Last ID
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-03-02 17:48:35 Re: Last ID