Re: pgpool versus sequences
От
Tom Lane
Тема
Re: pgpool versus sequences
Дата
Msg-id
14930.1307025118@sss.pgh.pa.us
Ответ на
Re: pgpool versus sequences (Robert Haas)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Re: pgpool versus sequences Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Re: pgpool versus sequences Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgpool versus sequences Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>
Re: pgpool versus sequences Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: pgpool versus sequences Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgpool versus sequences Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Re: pgpool versus sequences Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgpool versus sequences Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Re: pgpool versus sequences Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: pgpool versus sequences Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgpool versus sequences Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: >> Yeah -- why is LOCK SEQUENCE foo_seq not allowed? �Seems a simple thing >> to have. > It cause a grammar conflict. That's a lot of work for a purely cosmetic issue, though. What would be trivial is to let this work: regression=# create sequence s1; CREATE SEQUENCE regression=# begin; BEGIN regression=# lock table s1; ERROR: "s1" is not a table We should do that anyway, even if we put in the effort to support the other syntax. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления