Re: sequence / last_value problem

terry(at)greatgulfhomes(dot)com wrote:

>If she had never called nextval, then the sequence would still be on its
>first value, would that be why the dump did not include the setval
>statement???
>
>Just an idea...
>
to clarify: i never called nextval in the pgsql7.2.1 database.
the dump is from a pgsql7.1.3 database and there the value of
'last_value' is correctly set to ~2 000 000

Regards
Tina

>
>Terry Fielder
>Network Engineer
>Great Gulf Homes / Ashton Woods Homes
>terry(at)greatgulfhomes(dot)com
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
>>[mailto:pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org]On Behalf Of Tina Messmann
>>Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 9:38 AM
>>To: Joel Burton; pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
>>Subject: Re: [GENERAL] sequence / last_value problem
>>
>>
>>Joel Burton wrote:
>>[snip..]
>>
>>>pg_dump output should contain a setval() at the end to fix
>>>
>>this -- did you
>>
>>>take this out?
>>>
>>Thank you for the clarification.
>>No, i didn't take anything out from my dump and there is no setval at
>>the end of my dump file....
>>
>>Regards
>>Tina
>>
>>>
>>>HTH.
>>>
>>>Joel BURTON | joel(at)joelburton(dot)com | joelburton.com | aim: wjoelburton
>>>Knowledge Management & Technology Consultant
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>---------------------------(end of
>>broadcast)---------------------------
>>TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>>
>>http://archives.postgresql.org
>>