Received: from mclaren.timewarp.co.uk (mclaren.timewarp.co.uk [217.149.108.13]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD8B4475165 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 16:06:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [217.149.96.22] (helo=kenlinux.bithub.org) by mclaren.timewarp.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #3) id 17ZGmg-0003gQ-00; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 21:06:26 +0100 Subject: Re: Returning PK of first insert for second insert use. From: Ken Corey To: Peter Atkins Cc: "'pgsql-sql@postgresql.org'" In-Reply-To: <1CAD483B723BD611B0C10090274FF0685547CB@NXCDMAIL> References: <1CAD483B723BD611B0C10090274FF0685547CB@NXCDMAIL> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 29 Jul 2002 21:04:30 +0100 Message-Id: <1027973100.2360.278.camel@kenlinux.bithub.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Scanner: exiscan *17ZGmg-0003gQ-00*/.FxN5uMIms* http://duncanthrax.net/exiscan/ X-Archive-Number: 200208/28 X-Sequence-Number: 8874 On Mon, 2002-07-29 at 20:52, Peter Atkins wrote: > Is there a possibility of another application accessing the DB and using the > id before my function has completed the transaction? I'm concerned with the > possibility of cross-over of ID's if the insert hangs. > > There's no way to return the id of that insert inherently, and then use it > for the second insert? I think SQL uses something like ADD_ID, not sure. That's the beauty of the nextval statement. The database internally sequences requests to it so that you're kept out of harm's way. Say process A called the function,and nextval returns 16. The function now continues on its way, but is not finished when process B then calls the function (before A is done), and nextval returns 17. So, then function called by process A returns 16, and the function called by process B returns 17. That means that unless the results of process B depend in some way upon the results of process A, there's no problem. -Ken -- Ken Corey CTO http://www.atomic-interactive.com 07720 440 731