On Fri, 2003-01-17 at 12:36, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> This way, we don't need to bother with > >> touching the sequence at all during a CREATE USER with explicit sysid. > > > Well, the problem is that this could still cause the reuse of a deleted > > user, no? Wasn't that the problem we were originally trying to solve? > > Hmm, yeah I guess so. Okay, we do need to compare an explicit SYSID > setting to the sequence, and bump up the sequence if it's greater. > Annoying, but I guess there's no choice.
*puts on 'outside the box' hat* I'm sure most of you are familiar with at least one flavor of Unix, so I'm sure I'm not going to leave anyone confused. (I hope.) Why not maintain a sequence, but allow implicit UID assignment? ie; CREATE USER user --UID1; CREATE USER user2 WITH UID 2; --UID2 DROP USER user2 --buhbye; CREATE user2 --Now gets UID3; CREATE user3 WITH UID2 --user3 now has UID2; Default behaviour being if a UID has -been- used (not is -in- use) that it continues on? -Ketrien Saihr-Kenchedra I don't need no steeenking sig! http://ljpg.sf.net/ - http://www.blurty.com/~ketrien/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
