On 6/8/2004 11:46 AM, pgsql@mohawksoft.com wrote:
>>
>> This strikes me as a complete nonstarter.
>
> Tom, I have to chuckle here. You HATE every suggestion I ever make. I
> can't think of one thing I've suggested over the years that was ever met
> with enthusiasm. Never change. :-)
I happen to agree with Tom on this entire thread. I do not think that
sequences should be abused as a replacement for global shared variables.
I do think that PostgreSQL should instead have some sort of shared
memory segment for user variables. The accessor functions would place
locks and the like, and would have mechanisms like UNDO on rollback.
With all the limitations that has, inflexible size, garbage collection
and so on, it would yet be far superior to anything you've come up with
here.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #