From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
To: Charlie Toohey <ctoohey@pacbell.net>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: serial column vs. explicit sequence question
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 15:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20020613151223.D8240-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020613220911.3DB63D600@megazone.bigpanda.com>
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Charlie Toohey wrote:
> If session A and session B are concurrently doing the same master-detail
> transaction, wouldn't currval possibly reflect the sequence value used by the
> other session ? Or are you saying that since this will be an explicit
> transaction that currval won't reflect the fact that the sequence may have
> been incremented by another session ?
currval is defined to give the last value given to your session. The only
cases you have to watch out for are other potential nextvals in your
session (triggers/rules), but usually you can find those pretty easily.
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: sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com, ctoohey@pacbell.net
Subject: Re: serial column vs. explicit sequence question
In-Reply-To: <20020613151223.D8240-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
* 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