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

Re: Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems
Date: 2005-09-28 16:31:37
Message-ID: 7206.1127925097@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I still think we shouldn't be hashing this out during beta, but ...

We're looking at ways to fix some bugs.  It's never been the case that
our first-resort response to a bug is "pull out features".

> What would the final nextval() behavior be?  ::regclass binding?  How
> would late binding be done?  What syntax?

If I were prepared to say all that today, I would have just done it ;-)

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.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-09-28 16:42:13
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-09-28 16:13:38
Subject: Re: Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-09-28 16:42:13
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-09-28 16:13:38
Subject: Re: Proposed patch for sequence-renaming problems

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