Tom Lane wrote:
Given the thought that we need both
transactional and nontransactional state for a sequence, I'm kind of
inclined to leave the transactional data in pg_class. We could still
imagine putting the nontransactional state into a new pg_sequence
catalog indexed by, say, the pg_class O
"Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Of course if we still need one row in pg_class for the ACL's, that row
> might as well be a view.
Yeah, view or view-like thingie. Given the thought that we need both
transactional and nontransactional state for a sequence, I'm kind of
in
> Plan C would be to say that we don't need to preserve "SELECT * FROM
> seqname", but I'll bet there would be some hollering.
I'd like to hear this hollering first, before we create tons of views
:-)
Imho it is not a problem to remove it, I am for Plan C.
(Those with need for the select can stil
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:10:54AM +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> ??hel kenal p??eval, K, 2006-03-22 kell 16:11, kirjutas Tom Lane:
> > Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > How does one get at the missing fields. The only way I know is
> > > selecting from the sequence, but how does
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-03-22 kell 21:50, kirjutas Andrew Dunstan:
> Tom Lane said:
> > Darcy Buskermolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> On Wednesday 22 March 2006 13:11, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> (Thinks a bit...) Maybe it would work for pg_sequence to be a real
> >>> catalog with a row per sequ
Hm, good point. We could put 'em in pg_sequence, except that most of
the operations on pg_sequence rows will be nontransactional, and that
doesn't seem to square nicely with transactional updates on ACLs.
Maybe we need two catalogs just to separate the transactional and
nontransactional data for
"Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What happens to sequence ACLs?
Hm, good point. We could put 'em in pg_sequence, except that most of
the operations on pg_sequence rows will be nontransactional, and that
doesn't seem to square nicely with transactional updates on ACLs.
Maybe we need
Tom Lane said:
> Darcy Buskermolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Wednesday 22 March 2006 13:11, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> (Thinks a bit...) Maybe it would work for pg_sequence to be a real
>>> catalog with a row per sequence, and we also create a view named
>>> after the sequence that simply selects
Darcy Buskermolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wednesday 22 March 2006 13:11, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (Thinks a bit...) Maybe it would work for pg_sequence to be a real
>> catalog with a row per sequence, and we also create a view named after
>> the sequence that simply selects from pg_sequence wit
On Wednesday 22 March 2006 13:11, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > How does one get at the missing fields. The only way I know is
> > selecting from the sequence, but how does one work this into this
> > query? Somehow it seems that these things should be stored
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hannu Krosing wrote:
>> I guess we can't easily start locking some subarea of a page, say 256
>> byte subpage, or just the tuple.
> Huh, we _can_ lock individual tuples, using LockTuple() (or rather,
> heap_lock_tuple). Since the tuple is modified in p
Hannu Krosing wrote:
> I guess we can't easily start locking some subarea of a page, say 256
> byte subpage, or just the tuple.
> OTOH it may be possible as we don't need to lock page header for
> sequences as the tuple is updated in place and will not change in size.
Huh, we _can_ lock individu
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-03-22 kell 17:29, kirjutas Tom Lane:
> Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-03-22 kell 16:11, kirjutas Tom Lane:
> >> Yeah. I've occasionally toyed with the idea that sequences should be
> >> rows in a single catalog instead of indepen
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ãhel kenal päeval, K, 2006-03-22 kell 16:11, kirjutas Tom Lane:
>> Yeah. I've occasionally toyed with the idea that sequences should be
>> rows in a single catalog instead of independent tables as they are now.
>> This would make for a much smaller dis
Ühel kenal päeval, K, 2006-03-22 kell 16:11, kirjutas Tom Lane:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > How does one get at the missing fields. The only way I know is
> > selecting from the sequence, but how does one work this into this
> > query? Somehow it seems that these things s
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How does one get at the missing fields. The only way I know is
> selecting from the sequence, but how does one work this into this
> query? Somehow it seems that these things should be stored in a real
> system catalog.
Yeah. I've occasionally t
I'm updating the information schema for SQL:2003. I'm having some
difficulties with the "sequences" view. It should look approximately
like this (uninteresting stuff omitted):
CREATE VIEW sequences AS
SELECT CAST(current_database() AS sql_identifier) AS sequence_catalog,
CAST(nc.nsp
17 matches
Mail list logo
