Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: question for serial types with CHECK conditions
- From: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
- To: Guido Barosio <gbarosio(at)gmail(dot)com>
- Cc: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
- Subject: Re: question for serial types with CHECK conditions
- Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 12:25:17 +0200
On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 01:34:15PM -0300, Guido Barosio wrote: > My point was to step on the asumption that the implicit "serial" > call for a type represents the fact that the sequence will start > allways in the same place, unless inmediatelly after your "create > table" you plan to modify that, which makes no sense when we go back > to what the CREATE SEQUENCE represents for the case. I don't think we need to go second guessing what the user may or may not have wanted. If the user wanted this, we provide it. If the user didn't they'll notice soon enough. The most important thing is that it does exactly what it's documented to do. 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.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- References:
- question for serial types with CHECK conditions
- From: Guido Barosio
- Re: question for serial types with CHECK conditions
- From: Michael Glaesemann
- Re: question for serial types with CHECK conditions
- From: Guido Barosio
- question for serial types with CHECK conditions
- Prev by Date: Re: Reducing stats collection overhead
- Next by Date: Re: Feature freeze progress report
- Previous by thread: Re: question for serial types with CHECK conditions
- Next by thread: SOS, help me please, one problem towards the postgresql develope on windows
- Indexes: