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

Re: BUG #4582: Renaming sequences and default value

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan-Peter Seifert <Jan-Peter(dot)Seifert(at)gmx(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #4582: Renaming sequences and default value
Date: 2008-12-17 00:55:31
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Jan-Peter Seifert <Jan-Peter(dot)Seifert(at)gmx(dot)de> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't think there's really a problem here.  You've apparently got some
>> obsolete syntax in your CREATE commands:
>>> id integer NOT NULL DEFAULT nextval(('public.t2_id_seq'::text)::regclass)

> ... But then I saw the difference in nextval syntax
> etc.. The update tool in question uses the obsolete syntax. Has this
> text constant thing been official syntax for some time? I wonder why the
> person implementing this syntax into the tool did it in the first place.

It might not be entirely the tool's fault.  If you had something like
DEFAULT nextval('public.t2_id_seq') in an old version of PG (pre 8.1
I think) then the business with text is actually the most precise, if
not the most useful, translation of that --- pre 8.1 didn't have any way
to track renamings of a serial sequence and so this structure mimics its
semantics.  So you might have got to this state via a dump and reload.
Or maybe whoever wrote the tool copied what he saw in an old dump,
without realizing that it wasn't very desirable.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Miroslav NachevDate: 2008-12-17 07:30:18
Subject: BUG #4586: Supporting of Binary instead Bytea for Primary Keys
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-12-16 22:22:02
Subject: Re: BUG #4585: out parameter name cuases disruption in custom aggregate?

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