Re: Generating Lots of PKs with nextval(): A Feature Proposal
От | Peter Crabtree |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Generating Lots of PKs with nextval(): A Feature Proposal |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTikIAWCf2sbSqUvj-TDPN9bTRbux0Ortw_m1PZwL@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Generating Lots of PKs with nextval(): A Feature Proposal (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Generating Lots of PKs with nextval(): A Feature Proposal
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 5:04 PM, hubert depesz lubaczewski > <depesz@depesz.com> wrote: >> On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 02:07:27PM -0500, Kenneth Marshall wrote: >>> Hi Peter, >>> >>> All you need to do is define your own sequence with an >>> increment of 500. Look at: >>> >>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/sql-createsequence.html >> >> This is often not enough. For example - I want standard increment of 1, >> but right now I'm importing 10000 objects, and it would be simpler for >> me to get 10000 ids. Preferably in one block. >> >> This is not achievable now. I know I can 'alter sequence set increment >> by' - but this will also affect concurrent sessions. which might not be >> a problem, but it's a side effect that I don't want. >> >> +1 for original proposition, would love to get it. > > If we do this, I'm inclined to think that the extra argument to > nextval() should be treated as overriding the base increment rather > than specifying a multiplier for it. Other than that nitpick, it > sounds like a reasonable thing to allow. > After giving it some thought, that sounds better. You gain some functionality that way (temporarily overriding the interval) and lose none. Peter
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: