On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:40:54PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
>
> > I guess - the reason I'm a bit disappointed from the new behavior is that
> > we have used Postgresql for more than 10 years and it has never let us
> > down. We have been able to improve our product with every new release of
> > Postgres. This is the first time for me that a new release of Postgres
> > caused some severe headaches among our customers.
> >
>
> OK...but I am not surprised as to how this played out. The system doesn't
> expect ALTER SEQUENCE to be executed frequently and your example doesn't
> argue for it since setval is indeed provided and can handle the situation
> where you wish to skip to some other sequence number for subsequent calls.
>
> Disruption of existing code is unavoidable since two of the goals of this
> project are innovation and stability. That your customers discovered this
> particular instance of disruption is more on you than the project - major
> upgrades, especially the first few patch releases, don't end up seeing a
> wide variety of unusual setups (like this one) until they hit production
> since, as it seems here, people with those unusual setups are not putting
> it through its paces during the beta release period.
>
> David J.
Hi,
I am not trying to be snarky, but it really behooves users to test their
systems with a new release before moving to it and not let their unwitting
customers be their debug team. :(
Regards,
Ken
