Alexsander Rosa wrote:
> At 8.4 release notes, item "E.5.3.3.1. TRUNCATE" there's a sentence:
> "The start value of a sequence can be changed by ALTER SEQUENCE START WITH.
> "
>
> Maybe this sentence should be copied/moved to "E.5.3.4.1. ALTER" with extra
> text stating that START, in previous ver
Well, if it's not going to be fixed, then at least the docs should be
revised to warn all 8.4+ users to avoid this command and, if it's really
needed, always check the server version before using the ALTER SEQUENCE ...
START command, once it has a potentially hazardous bug that interprets it as
a R
At 8.4 release notes, item "E.5.3.3.1. TRUNCATE" there's a sentence:
"The start value of a sequence can be changed by ALTER SEQUENCE START WITH.
"
Maybe this sentence should be copied/moved to "E.5.3.4.1. ALTER" with extra
text stating that START, in previous versions, was an (unintended) alias to
Alexsander Rosa wrote:
> Well, if it's not going to be fixed, then at least the docs should be
> revised to warn all 8.4+ users to avoid this command and, if it's really
> needed, always check the server version before using the ALTER SEQUENCE ...
> START command, once it has a potentially hazardou
Alexsander Rosa wrote:
> What about the risk of using ALTER SEQUENCE ... START N in a mixed
> environment? In the 8.4.x servers it will work as designed but in the 8.3.x
> (and below) servers, instead of issuing an error it will CORRUPT the
> sequence value without notice. I understand the point of
What about the risk of using ALTER SEQUENCE ... START N in a mixed
environment? In the 8.4.x servers it will work as designed but in the 8.3.x
(and below) servers, instead of issuing an error it will CORRUPT the
sequence value without notice. I understand the point of keeping a
(mis)feature when it
Excerpts from Euler Taveira de Oliveira's message of mié sep 01 10:18:10 -0400
2010:
> Tom Lane escreveu:
> > I'm not inclined to go and retroactively document that these spellings
> > are possible but deprecated in the old branches. I think that would
> > just confuse matters even more.
>
> Is
Tom Lane escreveu:
> I'm not inclined to go and retroactively document that these spellings
> are possible but deprecated in the old branches. I think that would
> just confuse matters even more.
>
Is it worth preventing that sloppy implementation in the old branches?
--
Euler Taveira de Oli
Alexsander Rosa writes:
> Let me get this straight: in version 8.3 the ALTER SEQUENCE command has an
> *undocumented* [1] clause START that is actually an alias for RESTART (i.e.
> both reset the sequence value to the value passed by the mandatory
> argument).
Yeah. I just looked at the old code
-- Forwarded message --
From: Alexsander Rosa
Date: 2010/8/27
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #5629: ALTER SEQUENCE foo START execute a RESTART
To: Tom Lane
Let me get this straight: in version 8.3 the ALTER SEQUENCE command has an
*undocumented* [1] clause START that is actually an
On 2010-08-27 12:51 AM +0300, Tom Lane wrote:
Alexsander Rosa writes:
According the docs, 8.3 does NOT have a START clause -- only RESTART. I
think a START clause should raise an error at 8.3 servers; there's a chance
of someone run the command in several servers (like a pgdiff) and get
differe
Alexsander Rosa writes:
> According the docs, 8.3 does NOT have a START clause -- only RESTART. I
> think a START clause should raise an error at 8.3 servers; there's a chance
> of someone run the command in several servers (like a pgdiff) and get
> different behaviour for the same command.
We're
Then the docs are misleading:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/sql-altersequence.html
According the docs, 8.3 does NOT have a START clause -- only RESTART. I
think a START clause should raise an error at 8.3 servers; there's a chance
of someone run the command in several servers (like a p
"Alexsander" writes:
> CREATE SEQUENCE foo;
> SELECT setval('foo',12345);
> ALTER SEQUENCE foo START WITH 10; -- can't change value
> SELECT nextval('foo'); -- it's 10 instead of 12346
> Apparently START is executing a RESTART.
Yup. That's what it's defined to do, pre-8.4.
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 5629
Logged by: Alexsander
Email address: alexsander.r...@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 8.3.11
Operating system: Linux
Description:ALTER SEQUENCE foo START execute a RESTART
Details:
Steps to reproduce:
CREAT
15 matches
Mail list logo
