Re: Duplicate Unique Key constraint error

From: Tom Allison <tom(at)tacocat(dot)net>
To: Harpreet Dhaliwal <harpreet(dot)dhaliwal01(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Duplicate Unique Key constraint error
Date: 2007-07-11 10:24:35
Message-ID: D985E6C3-0D3F-480E-B8F6-459486A05C55@tacocat.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-odbc


On Jul 10, 2007, at 3:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:

>
> "Harpreet Dhaliwal" <harpreet(dot)dhaliwal01(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Transaction 1 started, saw max(dig_id) = 30 and inserted new
>> dig_id=31.
>> Now the time when Transaction 2 started and read max(dig_id) it
>> was still 30
>> and by the time it tried to insert 31, 31 was already inserted by
>> Transaction 1 and hence the unique key constraint error.
>
> This is exactly why you're recommended to use sequences (ie serial
> columns) for generating IDs. Taking max()+1 does not work, unless
> you're willing to lock the whole table and throw away vast amounts of
> concurrency.

I wonder how SQL server is handling this? Are they locking the table?
I realize it's off-topic, but I'm still curious.

Sequences are your friend. they come in INT and BIGINT flavors, but
BIGINT is a lot of rows.

Can set set Sequences to automatically rollover back to zero?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2007-07-11 12:06:53 Re: Day of week vs. Language
Previous Message Dave Page 2007-07-11 08:19:49 Re: [GENERAL] pgpass.conf

Browse pgsql-odbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zlatko Matic 2007-07-11 12:15:02 odbc parameters
Previous Message Eric E 2007-07-10 21:58:54 Re: Problem getting sequences under 8.02.03.00 driver