On Thursday 25 January 2007 09:53, Douglas McNaught wrote:
> Nature of the beast. Sequence increments aren't rolled back on
> transaction abort (for performance and concurrency reasons), so you
> should expect gaps.
Behavior long ago noted and accounted for. But I've always wondered why this
was so? Is there a specific reason for this behavior?
-Ben
--
"The best way to predict the future is to invent it."
- XEROX PARC slogan, circa 1978
