From: Rod Taylor <rbt@rbt.ca>
To: scott.marlowe <scott.marlowe@ihs.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: Thomas O'Connell <tfo@monsterlabs.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Bug with sequence
Date: 21 Nov 2002 15:23:50 -0500
Message-ID: <1037910229.56165.20.camel@jester> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0211211309330.23651-100000@css120.ihs.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0211211309330.23651-100000@css120.ihs.com>
On Thu, 2002-11-21 at 15:09, scott.marlowe wrote:
> On 21 Nov 2002, Rod Taylor wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2002-11-21 at 14:11, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Of course, those would be SQL purists who _don't_ understand
> > > concurrency issues. ;-)
> >
> > Or they're the kind that locks the entire table for any given insert.
>
> Isn't that what Bruce just said? ;^)
I suppose so. I took what Bruce said to be that multiple users could
get the same ID.
I keep having developers want to make their own table for a sequence,
then use id = id + 1 -- so they hold a lock on it for the duration of
the transaction.
--
Rod Taylor <rbt@rbt.ca>
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: rbt@rbt.ca, scott.marlowe@ihs.com, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, tfo@monsterlabs.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] Bug with sequence
In-Reply-To: <1037910229.56165.20.camel@jester>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox