| From: | "Rod Taylor" <rbt(at)zort(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, "Joe Conway" <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Hackers List" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Making serial survive pg_dump |
| Date: | 2002-06-14 23:07:56 |
| Message-ID: | 077e01c213f8$52575ef0$fe01a8c0@jester |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > I think that when SERIAL is used, the sequence should be tied
> > inextricably to the table which created it, and it should be
hidden from
> > use for other purposes (perhaps similar to the way a toast table
is). If
> > you *want* to use a sequence across several tables, then you don't
use
> > SERIAL, you create a sequence.
>
> Agreed. Maybe an extra column in pg_attribute or something?
Since no other sequence will depend on a column, I could base it on
that.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rocco Altier | 2002-06-14 23:09:44 | Re: Non-standard feature request |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-06-14 22:25:53 | Re: I must be blind... |