Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> What I was wondering is if we could create a currval() call that takes
> no arguments, and returns the most recent sequence id assigned.
Why? That's still an extra query that the client has to issue, and
currval in that form would be an amazingly fragile programming tool.
(What if some trigger causes an autoincrement on some other sequence
than the one you are thinking about?)
I liked the INSERT ... RETURNING and UPDATE ... RETURNING syntax
extensions that Philip Warner (IIRC) proposed awhile back. Those would
get the job done much more flexibly than anything else that's been
suggested. That's why I think it's a language problem and not a
protocol problem.
regards, tom lane