Re: support for NEXT VALUE FOR expression - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: support for NEXT VALUE FOR expression
Date
Msg-id 18876.1471407561@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: support for NEXT VALUE FOR expression  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> We discussed this before and concluded that NEXT VALUE FOR is in fact
>> *not* an exact semantic equivalent of nextval():
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/14790.1083955136%40sss.pgh.pa.us

> And also again 10 years later when I proposed it :-)
>
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CADLWmXUY2oo4XObQWF3yPUSK%3D5uEiSV%3DeTyLrnu%3DRzteOy%2B3Lg%40mail.gmail.com

And that links to yet another thread, from 2002 ;-)

The 2004 thread does contain some speculation about how to implement the
spec's semantics.  It seems like the first problem is nailing down what
is meant by "once per row", particularly in cases with nested execution
contexts.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: support for NEXT VALUE FOR expression
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: support for NEXT VALUE FOR expression