Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 568FB47616D; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 22:44:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from bob.samurai.com (bob.samurai.com [205.207.28.75]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796BF47614C; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 22:44:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from tokyo.samurai.com (DU150.N224.ResNet.QueensU.CA [130.15.224.150]) by bob.samurai.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D45641DD4; Wed, 20 Nov 2002 22:44:08 -0500 (EST) To: Justin Clift Cc: Oliver Elphick , Robert Treat , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Bug with sequence References: <92c0776e.0211180745.49911131@posting.google.com> <1037782392.29678.88.camel@linda> <1037828113.23925.101.camel@camel> <1037830378.24840.40.camel@linda> <3DDC47A9.4C0BC2DE@postgresql.org> From: Neil Conway In-Reply-To: <3DDC47A9.4C0BC2DE@postgresql.org> Date: 20 Nov 2002 22:44:06 -0500 Message-ID: <877kf74mex.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com> Lines: 26 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200211/838 X-Sequence-Number: 32054 Justin Clift writes: > This sounds like a serious bug in our behaviour, and not something > we'd like to release. It's not ideal, I agree, but I *definately* don't think this is grounds for changing the release schedule. > No real issue with the nicety for newbies, but am very concerned > about the lack of a dependancy check here. Well, how would you suggest we fix this? ISTM this is partially a result of the fact that we don't produce dependancy information for function bodies. While it might be possible to do so (in 7.4) for certain types of functions (e.g. for functions defined in SQL, PL/PgSQL, etc.), I can't see a general solution (e.g. for functions defined in C). And adding random hacks to get specific functions (e.g. nextval()) to work does not strike me as a very good idea. Cheers, Neil -- Neil Conway || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC