Re: alternative to using a sequence

From: "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: snacktime <snacktime(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: alternative to using a sequence
Date: 2006-08-26 15:07:33
Message-ID: b42b73150608260807s7730644fj5c9f1bcfeb1a0101@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 8/26/06, snacktime <snacktime(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I have an application that processes financial transactions. Each of
> these transactions needs to be sent with a sequence number. It starts
> at 1 and resets to 1 once it hits 8000. I'm trying to think of the
> most elegant solution without having to create a sequence for each
> user (there are hundreds). There is a table that holds the
> configuration parameters for each merchant, so a field in that table
> to hold the sequence number would be ideal. In the past I've used
> sequences as well as just a field which I query then update. Any
> other ideas?

How many sequences are we talking about?

merlin

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim 2006-08-26 18:35:56 Can't populate database using Copy
Previous Message Purusothaman A 2006-08-26 10:47:27 Win2000 professional / Error message while installing PostgreSQL "Failed to create process: 2! ".