>>Is there demand for this syntax:
>>
>>ALTER SEQUENCE ON table(col) CYCLE 100;
>>
>>It would allow us to become sequence-name independent...
>
>
> The above is an operation that would not help me a lot, but a way of
> performing currval() without knowing the sequence name would be good.
It will help in cases such as the 7.3-7.4 upgrade where a few of my
sequence names will get renamed because they maxed out at 32 characters...
I'll see about versions of currval() and nextval() that are sequence
name independent as well...
Chris
