On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 11:06:05AM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> If it's not obvious yet :-P, I'd be in favour of having SERIAL as
> black-box as possible, and then just use manual CREATE SEQUENCE and
> DEFAULT nextval() for when you need a more advanced case. But that's as
> seen from a user perspective, without regard for backend complexity.
That's where I sit as well.
SERIAL as a macro has no value to me. I'd rather write it out in full,
and make it obvious to the caller, what I'm doing. This way, I get to
choose the sequence name instead of having it generated for me, and
the GRANT expression makes more sense.
If SERIAL generated an 'anonymous' SEQUENCE, that was a real black
box, that had the same permissions as the table, I'd be tempted to use
it again.
I also see the db_dump example as proving more that the box isn't
black enough, than proving that the black box approach is wrong.
Cheers,
mark
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
