From: | elein <elein(at)varlena(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | elein <elein(at)varlena(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Usability or Data Bug in SERIAL column declarations |
Date: | 2004-10-28 00:54:09 |
Message-ID: | 20041027175409.J8064@cookie.varlena.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
But shouldn't it wrap when it hits the max?
Assuming wrapping is an OK behavior, not setting
a proper max will eliminate that option for overflow.
--elein
On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 08:30:37PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> elein <elein(at)varlena(dot)com> writes:
> > In both cases sequences are created as int8 values with
> > a maximum of 9223372036854775807.
>
> > BUG: The assignment of the table containing the int4 column
> > will overflow at 2147483648 (max integer size).
>
> I don't think this is really a problem.
>
> You are going to have errors when you run out of int4-sized identifiers
> in either case. If we reduce the sequence's maximum, that just means
> one more thing you'll have to fix in order to recover.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-28 01:02:01 | Re: Usability or Data Bug in SERIAL column declarations |
Previous Message | Anthony | 2004-10-28 00:41:36 | SSL password problem in PG-WIN32 |