Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not?
Date: 2006-04-30 03:15:20
Message-ID: 19067.1146366920@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
> Do both. Return SERIAL to being a macro and implement the SQL IDENTITY
> construct as the black box version.

Doesn't SQL IDENTITY have a number of properties that are significantly
different from serial/nextval? I wasn't really volunteering to
implement a large new feature to make this happen ;-)

Also, I'm not sure how "black boxy" it can be without buying right back
into the pg_dump problems. pg_dump has to be able to see what's inside,
I think.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rod Taylor 2006-04-30 04:32:16 Re: Is a SERIAL column a "black box", or not?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2006-04-30 02:24:48 Re: inet increment with int