Re: pg_dump versus SERIAL, round N

From: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, Morus Walter <morus(dot)walter(at)experteer(dot)de>
Subject: Re: pg_dump versus SERIAL, round N
Date: 2006-08-19 16:03:14
Message-ID: 20060819160314.GB23212@svana.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 11:47:39AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> ALTER SEQUENCE foo_bar_seq SERIAL FOR foo.bar;

I like it, and I imagine users will love it too. Only one question:
will a sequence be limited to belonging to one table at a time, or
could you use one sequence for multiple tables and use this to declare
a dependancy on them all?

Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to litigate.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-08-19 16:25:26 Re: pg_dump versus SERIAL, round N
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-19 15:47:39 pg_dump versus SERIAL, round N