Thank you, this helps get me on the right path.
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Scott Marlowe<scott.marlowe@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Merrick<merrick@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I was hoping there would be a way to add a field the sequence table
>> postgresql automatically generates so I could rely on whatever
>> mechanism postgresql uses to avoid the problems described thus far.
>>
>> I should have included more info, it's highly likely that multiple
>> users will be accessing using same customer_id when creating orders
>> thus deadlocks would be an issue I would like to avoid.
>>
>> Having the sequence be gapless would not be a requirement.
>
> Hmmm. Well, are those users gonna be holding a lock while they do a
> lot of hand processing work? Do they need that id before they start a
> lot of complex work? In that case, you could do things two fold.
> Lock the rows, create an empty but ready to go one, commit, then come
> back later and update the row.
>