Bruce Momjian wrote: <blockquote type="CITE">> > The sequence po_seq is advancing to the next value even though
the<br />> > transaction was aborted. If I put other things like updates, inserts, etc. <br />> > inside
thetransaction, they seem to be rolled back OK, but not the <br />> > update of the sequence. <br />> > <br
/>>> Am I doing something wrong? <br />> <br />> No. I can't explain you why but AFAIK sequences don't
rollback.<p>If we rolled back sequence numbers, we would have to lock the table <br />until the transaction commited or
wasrolled back. That is too much <br />locking so was not worth it. <br /> </blockquote><p><br />That seems like a
prettybig thing to sacrifice. Did sequence locking work before 6.5? It was my impression that it did. <p>Do you know
ifthere is a workaround? In my particular situation, it is critical that all instances of the sequence actually get
used. If a transaction is aborted, I lose an instance and everything gets messed up. <pre>--
----------------------------------------------------
Kyle Bateman President, Action Target Inc.
"Viva Yo!" kyle@actarg.com (801)377-8033x101
----------------------------------------------------</pre>
