I'm assuming that the setval would create an exclusive lock on the
sequence until it is complete. Tom/Bruce?
nolan@celery.tssi.com wrote:
>>select setval('id',nextval('id')+100)
>>
>>
>
>That's certainly tidier than my lengthy SQL statement, but I don't know
>that it solves the concurrent access issue. What happens if a 2nd call
>to nextval is issued at the same time?
>--
>Mike Nolan
>
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
>
