John Hansen wrote: > > > > What do people think of this idea? (Tom seems opposed, I'm just > > > > wondering if there are other opinions out there.) > > > > > > I'm all for it. Even more so if the 'currval(void) called before > > > nextval(seq_name)' error message could be supressed by a > > GUC variable > > > and return 0 instead. > > > > Why zero and no error? > > That's the exact behaviour of the "other database's" equivalent. > Makes porting easier, and avoids hugely annoying error messages in the > logfiles.
I think we would have to throw an error. It is hard to see how zero is a valid return value. If you are getting too many errors in your logs, fix the code. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (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 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
