Re: pgpool versus sequences - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pgpool versus sequences
Date
Msg-id 27667.1307044470@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgpool versus sequences  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Please note also that what pgpool users have got right now is a time
>> bomb, which is not better than immediately-visible breakage. �I would
>> prefer to try to get this change out ahead of widespread adoption of the
>> broken pgpool version.

> Hmm, I gather from what Tatsuo is saying at the web site that this has
> only been broken since the release of 3.0 on February 23rd, so given
> that I think your approach makes sense.

Done, and I also installed a kluge to clean up the damage retroactively
during any nextval/setval operation.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Estimating total amount of shared memory required by postmaster
Next
From: Radosław Smogura
Date:
Subject: Re: BLOB support