On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 11:09:57AM -0700, Brian Aker wrote: > We have a SERIAL type as well, though it just maps to AUTOINCREMENT. I > have thought about fixing it to just be a SERIAL and not allow for human > interaction.
IIRC the main motivation for SERIAL (or at least the documented one, if not the in-reality one) was to be compatible with PostgreSQL's SERIAL type (which changed around 7.1 to by default not be unique). Sounds like it should be an alias for 64bit auto-incrementing integer. Perhaps with adding a flag for each column of having it not user settable. This'd be great for TIMESTAMPs as well. -- Stewart Smith _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
