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

Re: next value expression

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: next value expression
Date: 2002-11-27 18:20:19
Message-ID: 1038421219.7588.47.camel@tokyo (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 12:24, Tom Lane wrote:
> I would think his point is that the above paragraph specifies behavior
> that is very definitely NOT like Postgres'.

Ah, I see now -- yeah, I misunderstood.

> > I submitted a patch for 7.4 that adjusts the
> > CREATE SEQUENCE grammar to match SQL2003's CREATE SEQUENCE a little more
> > closely,
> Did we apply it?  I'm inclined not to, until we nail down the semantic
> implications a little more.  Conforming to the spec on syntax when we
> don't on semantics strikes me as a bad idea.

I agree, although the patch has already been applied.

There's already a need to reform the way in which the next value of a
sequence is produced (nextval() makes it difficult to get the dependancy
information right); would it be a good idea to change it to be
completely SQL compatible at the same time?



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David WheelerDate: 2002-11-27 18:24:51
Subject: ANNOUNCE: DBD::Pg 1.20
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-11-27 17:24:14
Subject: Re: next value expression

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group