Re: [GENERAL] Incrementing a Serial Field - Mailing list pgsql-general

From David Hartwig
Subject Re: [GENERAL] Incrementing a Serial Field
Date
Msg-id 3647296F.6F7FDDD2@insightdist.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Incrementing a Serial Field  (Bob Kruger <bkruger@mindspring.com>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] Incrementing a Serial Field  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
 

Bob Kruger wrote:

The second question is that I noticed the ODBC bug (feature?) when linking
Postgres to MS Access still exists.  This bug occurs when linking a MS
Access table to a Postgres table, and identifying more than one field as
the unique record identifier.  This makes Postgres run until it exhausts
all available memory.  Does anyone know a way around this?  Enabling read
only ODBC is a feature I would like to make available, but I do not want
the possibility of postgres crashing because of an error on the part of a
MS Access user.

BTW - Having capability to be linked to an Access database is not an
option.  The current project I am working on calls for that, so it is a
necessary evil that I hav to live with.
 

In the driver connection settings add the following line.

    SET ksql TO 'on';

Stands for: keyset query optimization.  This is not considered a final solution.  As such, it is undocumented.   Some time in the next day or so, we will be releasing a version of the driver which will automatically SET ksqo.

You will most likely be satisfied with the results.   One problem with this solution, however,  is that it does not work if you have any (some kinds of?) arrays in the table you are browsing.   This is a sideffect of the rewrite to a UNION which performs an internal sort unique.

Also, if you are using row versioning you may need to overload some operators for xid and int4.  I have included a script that will take care of this.

Bruce, can I get these operators hardcoded into 6.4.1- assuming there will be one.   The operators  necessitated by the UNION sideffects.
 

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Charles Curley
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Case insensitive "contains" search
Next
From: Robert Church
Date:
Subject: 'now' is the future