Re: Could be improved point of UPSERT - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Could be improved point of UPSERT
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZQkfqf=Z8cQq4z7bvbetY0tZ6BF-2v6+itDS+RRtTXKGQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Could be improved point of UPSERT  (Yourfriend <doudou586@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Could be improved point of UPSERT
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:01 AM, Yourfriend <doudou586@gmail.com> wrote:
> for example, SO201507_1001, PO201503_1280, etc.
>
> As these IDs would be the most important attribute to the business, so, we
> hope there is no gap for the IDs.

That's a requirement I've heard a number of times before. If you're
relying on a sequence for this purpose, your application is already
broken [1]. UPSERT need not be involved at all.

[1] http://www.varlena.com/GeneralBits/130.php
-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: [DESIGN] Incremental checksums
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Memory Accounting v11