Re: Sequences

From: Andrew Rawnsley <ronz(at)ravensfield(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Sequences
Date: 2003-09-19 05:37:14
Message-ID: 52D9035D-EA63-11D7-9371-000393A47FCC@ravensfield.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


Oh, its a sticky problem, to be sure. Have to get something working at
some point, though...

You're point about approximate solutions is well taken.

On Friday, September 19, 2003, at 01:11 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

> Andrew Rawnsley <ronz(at)ravensfield(dot)com> writes:
>> On Friday, September 19, 2003, at 12:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> What is the problem you really want to solve?
>
>> Hacking some semblance of sequence support into eRserver.
>
> Hmm. I don't see a lot of value in an approximate solution. Either
> the
> sequence is up to date at the slave, or it is not. What's the point of
> "almost up to date"? You'd still have to take some action along the
> lines of "select setval('seq', (select max(col) from tab))" during any
> failover. If you have to do that, it doesn't matter what the sequence
> value was.
>
> Perhaps sequence increments could be broadcast to slaves as-is, using
> some variant of the existing erserver protocol that understands that
> these things happen outside transaction control.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--------------------

Andrew Rawnsley
President
The Ravensfield Digital Resource Group, Ltd.
(740) 587-0114
www.ravensfield.com

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Deepa K 2003-09-19 06:35:03 About Pgdump
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-09-19 05:30:31 Re: PostgreSQL versus MySQL