Re: .sequence_name != ?
| От | Ed L. |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 200304041127.36082.pgsql@bluepolka.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на |
Re: |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Friday April 4 2003 10:24, Tom Lane wrote: > "Ed L." <pgsql@bluepolka.net> writes: > > When a sequence is created in 7.3.2, it appears you get a new table for > > each sequence object. Is it ever possible for the sequence_name in a > > sequence relation not to match the name of the relation itself? > > In general I'd counsel that you should ignore the sequence_name field > anyway. It's vestigial. A related question: Is there a single generalized SQL query which can yield the set of (sequence_name, last_value) pairs for all sequence objects? The fact that each sequence is its own relation seems to block that, and the query constructed from grabbing sequence names from pg_class gets quite long for more than just a few sequence objects... Ed
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: