Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> The most effective solution might be to revert the change in pg_migrator
> >> and instead have pg_dump interpret --binary-upgrade --schema-only to
> >> include the data for sequences. It seems ugly as sin though :-(
>
> > Uh, how is this going to behave in 8.5? Do we still dump sequences, and
> > if so, aren't we heading down the road of dumping stuff only because a
> > previous release needed it?
>
> In 8.5 we'll probably have it go over to treating sequences the same as
> other user tables. What, do you think that'll be the only change
> required in pg_migrator's behavior between 8.4 and 8.5? I think it'll
> more likely be down in the noise ...
I am just worried about jerking pg_dump around as pg_migrator's needs
change.
> > Can we run a query that just shifts columns around in the sequence heap
> > files we migrated?
>
> Nope. That's not exposed at the SQL level, even if we allowed ALTER
> TABLE on sequences (which I sure hope we don't).
Ah, I see what you mean:
test=> create sequence xx;seCREATE SEQUENCEtest=> select * from xx; sequence_name | last_value | start_value |
increment_by| max_value | min_value | cache_value | log_cnt | is_cycled
|is_called---------------+------------+-------------+--------------+---------------------+-----------+-------------+---------+-----------+-----------
xx | 1 | 1 | 1 |9223372036854775807 | 1 | 1 | 1 | f
| f(1 row)test=> update xx set last_value = 3;ERROR: cannot change sequence "xx"
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +