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

Re: Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems
Date: 2005-09-28 16:47:41
Message-ID: 433AC92D.1000207@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches

Tom Lane wrote:

>The more I think about it, the more I think that two sets of function
>names might not be such an awful idea.  next_value(), curr_value(), and
>set_value() seem like they'd work well enough.  Then we'd just say that
>nextval and friends are deprecated except when you need late binding,
>and we'd be done.
>
>
>  
>

Personally, I like this more than the overloading idea.

cheers

andrew

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Michael PaesoldDate: 2005-09-28 16:57:00
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-09-28 16:42:13
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Michael PaesoldDate: 2005-09-28 16:57:00
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-09-28 16:42:13
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems

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