On 8/19/20 3:24 PM, Shantanu Shekhar wrote:
Please reply to list also.
Ccing list.
> Thanks Adrian,
>
> I will reach out to the ORM team and see if they can help me understand
> this behavior.
I should have asked earlier, is this sequence set as a DEFAULT on the PK
field or is it just being used by code to get numbers?
>
> Shantanu
> On Wednesday, August 19, 2020, 06:20:27 PM EDT, Adrian Klaver
> <
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 8/19/20 3:15 PM, Shantanu Shekhar wrote:
> > Team,
> >
> > I have a sequence definition in Postgres 9.6.11 like so:
> >
> > CREATE SEQUENCE IF NOT EXISTS org.my_seq
> > INCREMENT 1
> > MINVALUE 1
> > NO MAXVALUE
> > START 1
> > CACHE 20;
> >
> > This sequence is used by a Java ORM framework to generate primary keys
> > for one of our tables. The initial numbers generated by this sequence
> > are as shown below:
> >
> > -28 -27 -26 -25 -8 -7 1 2 52 53 72 92 93 94 112 113 132 133 152 172 192
> > 193 212
> >
> > I am unable to understand why the sequence would start with a negative
> > number, particularly when the definition explicitly asks the sequence to
> > start at 1. This has happened consistently in all of our environments.
>
> Because something in the ORM is generating negative numbers and
> supplying then directly to the PK field.
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Shantanu
>
>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
>
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com <mailto:
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com>
