Re: Transaction atomicity

From: Giuseppe Sacco <giuseppe(at)eppesuigoccas(dot)homedns(dot)org>
To: pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Transaction atomicity
Date: 2007-03-07 17:25:05
Message-ID: 1173288305.20645.67.camel@scarafaggio
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

Hi Heikki,

Il giorno mer, 07/03/2007 alle 16.36 +0000, Heikki Linnakangas ha
scritto:
[...]
> If you don't want to have a two-field key, for example because you can't
> change the schema you already have, you could still divide a range of
> ids for each office when you create the sequence:
>
> CREATE SEQUENCE fooseq MINVALUE 10000000 MAXVALUE 19999999 NO CYCLE

This is the same solution I was thinking of, and probably the best one.
I checked that currently the application only loops an average of 4
times, so I don't have a real urgency of switching to sequences. I will
implement this code in two weeks from now, since I should have enough
time.

Thanks again,
Giuseppe

P.S. Just a note, I will not specify "NO CYCLE" since it seems to be the
default behaviour and since it seems oracle uses "NOCYCLE" in one word.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heiko W.Rupp 2007-03-08 16:06:53 Re: Inserting "null" not working (Sun App Server, Postgres, EJB3)?
Previous Message Giuseppe Sacco 2007-03-07 16:39:00 Re: Transaction atomicity