Re: Sequence Access Method WIP

From: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
To: Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Sequence Access Method WIP
Date: 2014-11-09 19:47:37
Message-ID: 545FC4D9.2020901@vmware.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11/08/2014 01:57 AM, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> My main problem is actually not with having tuple per-seqAM, but more
> with the fact that Heikki does not want to have last_value as compulsory
> column/parameter. How is the new AM then supposed to know where to pick
> up and if it even can pick up?

Call nextval(), and use the value it returns as the starting point for
the new AM.

- Heikki

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-11-09 20:58:15 Re: WIP: dynahash replacement for buffer table
Previous Message Greg Stark 2014-11-09 17:57:25 Re: BRIN indexes - TRAP: BadArgument