Scott,
I understand it all.
If a programmer understand that currval() return the last_(used)_value
and did not himself call nextval() he should be aware of the caveat.
I did not want to make a big fuss of it. I will just use select
last_value myself since I am already aware of the caveat. :)
JLL
"scott.marlowe" wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Jean-Luc Lachance wrote:
>
> > Alvara,
> >
> > But instead of returning an error, currval() should return last_value if
> > nextval() was not called (with all the caveat of couse). I think it
> > would be more usefull that way.
>
> no, that would be like walking around with a gun pointed at your foot, to
> quote Tom Lane.
>
> See my post on transactions and such. Remember that everything in
> Postgresql is designed to make transactions safe. currval working without
> a nextval or setval before it is dangerous in the exterme to transactions.
