On Fri, 2004-05-07 at 14:38, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > NEXT VALUE FOR and CURRENT VALUE FOR where CURRENT is an unreserved
> > keyword and VALUE is not reserved in any way (ident with comparison to
> > "value").
>
> I see one pretty big problem with this: the SQL2003 spec says clearly
> that multiple occurrences of NEXT VALUE FOR should all generate the same
> value within a particular row. (See, eg, last sentence of 4.21.2 or the
<snip>
> Offhand I see no simple way to do what the spec asks for within Postgres
> :-( but that doesn't mean we should ignore the requirement.
You're right. I had missed that.
Does that mean the below insert should give both col1 and col2 the same
value?
CREATE TABLE test (
col1 integer DEFAULT NEXT VALUE FOR t_seq,
col2 integer DEFAULT NEXT VALUE FOR t_seq
);
INSERT INTO TABLE DEFAULT VALUES;
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: 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
