On 18 October 2012 16:15, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > But I'd want to see a pretty > bulletproof argument why overriding *only* nextval is sufficient > (and always will be) before accepting a hook for just nextval. If we > build an equivalent amount of functionality piecemeal it's going to > be a lot uglier than if we recognize we need this type of concept > up front.
We discussed that we need only nextval() and setval() elsewhere, but adding others is fairly cheap so we can chew on that when we have a patch to discuss. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
