Re: pg_dump and sequences - RFC
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: pg_dump and sequences - RFC |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 25958.970153268@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: pg_dump and sequences - RFC (Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au>) |
| Ответы |
Re: pg_dump and sequences - RFC
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au> writes:
> OK. Given the discussion of 'select nextval', do you know if 'select
> setval' will set the is_called flag?
Looks like it does, both by experiment and by reading the code.
So if you issue a setval() you don't need a nextval() as well.
However you still have the problem that you can't recreate the
state of a virgin (never-nextval'd) sequence this way. The
existing pg_dump code is correct, in that it will reproduce the
state of a sequence whether virgin or not. A data-only reload
would fail to make that guarantee unless you drop and recreate
the sequence.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: