Re: Sequences in transaction
От | Camm Maguire |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sequences in transaction |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 54g0jvx7d9.fsf@intech19.enhanced.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | views/stored procedures (Jeff Davis <jdavis@wasabimg.com>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
Greetings! I've just found .. nothing! This works pretty well to my surprise. Thanks so much for the suggestion. I did a little rewrite which builds a doubly-linked list table of dates, with prior date and next date columns maintained by triggers. I then retrieve adjacent pairs of data table rows via a merge with this table. This appears to be faster than issuing a subselect .... order by ... limit 1 for each data row, but your key idea (to me, at least) is that I can avoid sequential sequence numbers by making explicit reference to the order of the date values themselves. Thanks again! Mike Castle <dalgoda@ix.netcom.com> writes: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 12:03:40PM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote: > > need to be able to *quickly* select a pair of *adjacent* rows in a > > table. t2.seq = t1.seq + 1 seems to work pretty well. Of course, I > > What's wrong with a select ... order by .. limit 2 ? > > mrc > -- > Mike Castle Life is like a clock: You can work constantly > dalgoda@ix.netcom.com and be right all the time, or not work at all > www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/ and be right at least twice a day. -- mrc > We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen > > -- Camm Maguire camm@enhanced.com ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: