Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, AFAICT, the only part of the spec we cannot implement is what you
> quote above. Therefore, why can't we support NEXT VALUE FOR seqname and
> reject table creation/alteration which would add more than one reference
> to the same sequence.

And how are you going to determine whether a query (not a table
definition) contains more than one NEXT VALUE FOR the same sequence?
Bear in mind some of them could be hidden down inside views or

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to