Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Skipping numbers in a sequence.

From: Andrew McMillan <Andrew(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>
To: GH <grasshacker(at)over-yonder(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Skipping numbers in a sequence.
Date: 2000-11-26 10:33:39
Message-ID: 3A20E703.F0119931@catalyst.net.nz (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-novice
GH wrote:
> 
> >
> > Er, to answer my own question, yes.
> > I seem to have discovered that the maximum maxvalue for a sequence is
> > 9,999,999,999 (i.e. 10 digits) -- which leads one to believe that 10 is
> > the max num of digits for an integer-type column.
> [Must...stop...coding...while...asleep...and....braindead.]
> 
> The max for maxvalue is the max(integer) which I believe is 2147483647.

So if you stick with the current standard, you can create ten per second
for the next 6.8 years before you have to worry.

I think that by then PostgreSQL will have INT8 sequences, or you will
have learned enough to implement them yourself :-)

Regards,
					Andrew.
-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
            Andrew McMillan, e-mail: Andrew(at)cat-it(dot)co(dot)nz
Catalyst IT Ltd, PO Box 10-225, Level 22, 105 The Terrace, Wellington
Me: +64 (21) 635 694, Fax: +64 (4) 499 5596, Office: +64 (4) 499 2267

In response to

Responses

pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: GHDate: 2000-11-26 10:47:34
Subject: Re: Skipping numbers in a sequence.
Previous:From: Mitch VincentDate: 2000-11-26 08:02:59
Subject: Re: Re: [NOVICE] Re: re : PHP and persistent connections

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: GHDate: 2000-11-26 10:47:34
Subject: Re: Skipping numbers in a sequence.
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-11-26 04:35:40
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Indexing for geographic objects?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group