Re: Serial not so unique? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Stephen Robert Norris
Subject Re: Serial not so unique?
Date
Msg-id 20010819062512.B16924@sunhill.commsecure.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Serial not so unique?  ("Joe Conway" <joseph.conway@home.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Sat, Aug 18, 2001 at 06:17:17AM -0700, Joe Conway wrote:
> > Sometimes (about 20%, it seems) with several of the data sets, we
> > get an error trying to insert rows into the table with the serial in it.
> > On investigation, it seems that the serial number has got to 101, then
> > set itself back to 4, causing nextval to return 5, and there are already
> > entries from 1-101.
> >
> > Now, we use the serial as the primary key, and we never explicitly set it.
> >
> > Has anyone seen anything like this? I can work around it by generating
> > a serial number within the application, but that's not ideal.
>
> Odd problem. What do you get if you run:
>     select * from name_of_this_troublesome_sequence;
> particularly for increment_by, max_value, min_value, and is_cycled?
>
> -- Joe

1, 2^31 -1, 1, f

    Stephen

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Stephan Szabo
Date:
Subject: Re: Glacial delete
Next
From: Stephen Robert Norris
Date:
Subject: Re: Serial not so unique?