Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 13:26:17 -0400
From: "Chad N. Tindel" <chad@tindel.net>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: "scott.marlowe" <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>,
	pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Mysql -> Postgresql pitfalls
Message-ID: <20030804172617.GB36172@calma.pair.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0308040910090.10259-100000@css120.ihs.com>
	<200308040949.01128.josh@agliodbs.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200308040949.01128.josh@agliodbs.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

> > > Yes.  The documentation very clearly states using sequences instead of
> > > auto-increment, but it doesn't make it clear that inserting the id's into
> > > data by hand doesn't cause the sequence to be auto-matically incremented.
> > >  It'd be nice of postgres had a way to trigger an update of the sequence
> > > value after every insert containing an id clumn.
> 
> Um, how would this be a bennefit?   If you're inserting rows 101-259, how does 
In mysql, when you insert into an auto_increment field and you specify an id, 
all future requests to insert a row without specifying the ID will still work
properly.  In postgres, if you specify the id, your next insert without and
id will fail because the sequence won't have been updated.

> FWIW, in 7.5 we're likely to implement SQL3 IDENTITY columns ... basically 
> just a SERIAL column where you don't have the option of inserting your own 
> value, you have to take what it gives you.

Interesting... how do you import data from a dump with such columsn?

Chad