Re: NEXT VALUE FOR...
От | Rod Taylor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: NEXT VALUE FOR... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1083955965.28644.16.camel@jester обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: NEXT VALUE FOR... (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: NEXT VALUE FOR...
|
Список | pgsql-patches |
On Fri, 2004-05-07 at 14:38, Tom Lane wrote: > Rod Taylor <pg@rbt.ca> 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;
В списке pgsql-patches по дате отправления: