Re: [HACKERS] Notes about int8 sequences

2001-08-07 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > > I'm not worried about the size of the return type of > > a sequence, but I like the idea of Oracle-compatible > > "seq.nextval" syntax. > > I didn't realize we had any Oracle-compatibility issues here. What > exactly does Oracle's sequence facility look li

Re: [HACKERS] Notes about int8 sequences

2001-08-07 Thread Tom Lane
Matthew Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm not worried about the size of the return type of > a sequence, but I like the idea of Oracle-compatible > "seq.nextval" syntax. I didn't realize we had any Oracle-compatibility issues here. What exactly does Oracle's sequence facility look like?

Re: [HACKERS] Notes about int8 sequences

2001-08-07 Thread Matthew Kirkwood
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > * How should one invoke nextval() and friends on such a sequence? > Perhaps we could allow people to write nextval(sequencename) and/or > sequencename.nextval, which would expose the sequence object to the > parser so that datatype overloading could occur.