On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 at 22:00, Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 03:53:28PM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote: > > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > >> It's possible that we could get away with just summarily changing > >> the argument type from text to regclass. ISTR that we did exactly > >> that with nextval() years ago, and didn't get too much push-back. > >> But we couldn't do the same for the return type. Also, this > >> approach does nothing for the concern about the name being > >> misleading. > > > > Maybe we should go all the way the other way, and call it > > pg_get_identity_sequence() and claim that "serial" is a legacy form of > > identity columns? > > Hm. Could we split it into two functions, pg_get_owned_sequence() and > pg_get_identity_sequence()? I see that commit 3012061 [0] added support > for identity columns to pg_get_serial_sequence() because folks expected > that to work, so maybe that's a good reason to keep them together. If we > do elect to keep them combined, I'd be okay with renaming it to > pg_get_identity_sequence() along with your other proposed changes.
I have changed the status of the patch to "Waiting on Author" as Nathan's comments have not yet been followed up. Regards, Vignesh
