Hi Tom, > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 02 February 2005 15:35 > To: Mark Cave-Ayland > Cc: 'Alvaro Herrera'; 'Michael Fuhr'; 'Mitch Pirtle'; 'Tatsuo > Ishii'; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NOVICE] Last ID Problem
(cut) > No. The thing everyone is ignoring here is that the INSERT > command tag format is not something we can just go and > change. You certainly could not put anything in it that > wasn't an integer, and I'm not sure it would even be safe to > put a bigint. So most of the cases you might actually want > (timestamp, bigserial, etc) would be ruled out. Hardly worth > inventing such a feature. OK, I didn't realise it was the command tag that was the issue here. I took a look at the libpq source to see how the INSERT tag works and it looks like it currently assumes a string of numbers. So as a minimum it would need some form of protocol extension to get this work (which I see from the archives that you were not keen to pursue). > How is what you're suggesting more portable? I was hoping that it would only require minimal change (but obviously that is not the case). I think, out of the remaining options, that keeping with currval() is going to be the best approach - I can't really see the benefit of using a non-SQL standard command just for SQL insertion, mainly as you and others have suggested for portability reasons :( Kind regards, Mark. ------------------------ WebBased Ltd South West Technology Centre Tamar Science Park Plymouth PL6 8BT T: +44 (0)1752 791021 F: +44 (0)1752 791023 W: http://www.webbased.co.uk ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
