Dumb i am.. nextval() already issued the next one to the sequence. I probably dont need a separate table.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Aras Angelo <araskok...@gmail.com> wrote: > Daniel, Craig > > The gaps are not really expected. It is set once only. > Its about printing packing slips for ecommerce orders. We have the ORDER ID > sequence, but so many different stations are accessing these orders, if my > station print the next 100 orders from the que, id like to give them values > starting from MAX(print_number_sequence so far) AND +1, +2, +3, .... +100. > > I hope this clears it better. I think a sequence can work. My concern was > performance, as in the actual programming LOOP, querying the max field, > assigning the row number, reissuing the max field. A sequence i guess, would > perform better than a regular table index? > > > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Craig James > <craig_ja...@emolecules.com>wrote: > >> On 9/16/10 3:54 PM, Aras Angelo wrote: >> >>> Hello All >>> >>> I have a column in my table which is incrementally updated. >>> >> >> Try to give us more details... >> >> Does the column need have contiguous values or are "gaps" ok? That is, >> does it have to be 1,2,3,4,...,N-1,N or is it ok to have something like >> 1,3,4,7,...,M (where M>N) for N rows? >> >> Is the value updated every time the row is changed, or is it set once >> only? >> >> If gaps are OK, then a sequence is a simple answer. >> >> Craig >> >> >> -- >> Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@postgresql.org) >> To make changes to your subscription: >> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin >> > >
