Have we decided it's really too difficult to remove all references to a given sysid when the user is dropped? It seems like we're creating multiple new problems in an effort to workaround one existing problem.
Robert Treat On Fri, 2003-01-17 at 12:38, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> This way, we don't need to bother with > > >> touching the sequence at all during a CREATE USER with explicit sysid. > > > > > Well, the problem is that this could still cause the reuse of a deleted > > > user, no? Wasn't that the problem we were originally trying to solve? > > > > Hmm, yeah I guess so. Okay, we do need to compare an explicit SYSID > > setting to the sequence, and bump up the sequence if it's greater. > > Annoying, but I guess there's no choice. > > Yea, I wished we could have avoided it too, but at least we are removing > the sequential scan. > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road > + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
