On Fri, 10 Jul 2020 at 10:27, Jeremy Schneider
wrote:
>
> OP asked for a way to call setval() with a guarantee the sequence will
> never go backwards IIUC. His code can check that the new value he wants to
> set is higher than the current value, but there’s a race condition where a
> second conne
>> On Jul 9, 2020, at 14:08, Christopher Browne wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 12:59, Jeremy Schneider
>> wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Jul 6, 2020, at 19:06, Paul McGarry wrote:
>> >
>> > I don't think I can use setval(), because it risks making sequences go
>> > backwards, eg:
>> >
>> > 1)
Christopher Browne writes:
> On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 12:59, Jeremy Schneider
> wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Jul 6, 2020, at 19:06, Paul McGarry wrote:
>> >
>> > I don't think I can use setval(), because it risks making sequences go
>> backwards, eg:
>> >
>> > 1) Check values
>> > DB1sequence: 1234
>> >
On Thu, 9 Jul 2020 at 12:59, Jeremy Schneider
wrote:
>
> > On Jul 6, 2020, at 19:06, Paul McGarry wrote:
> >
> > I don't think I can use setval(), because it risks making sequences go
> backwards, eg:
> >
> > 1) Check values
> > DB1sequence: 1234
> > DB2sequence: 1233 (1 behind)
> > 2) setval('D
> On Jul 6, 2020, at 19:06, Paul McGarry wrote:
>
> I don't think I can use setval(), because it risks making sequences go
> backwards, eg:
>
> 1) Check values
> DB1sequence: 1234
> DB2sequence: 1233 (1 behind)
> 2) setval('DB2sequence',1234);
>
> but if between (1) and (2) there are 2 nextv
On 7/6/20 7:06 PM, Paul McGarry wrote:
I have two sequences in different dbs which I want to keep roughly in
sync (they don't have to be exactly in sync, I am just keeping them in
the same ballpark).
Currently I have a process which periodically checks the sequences and does:
1) Check values
