On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hmm. That's a possibility. There's some potential for trouble if an
> application is expecting an int4 result from "SELECT nextval()" and
> gets int8 instead, but if we think we could live with that...
I assume there will be the same limitations as you mentioned in your
original message. Ie. some systems don't have an 8-byte-int C datatype
so would still have the 2^31 limit.
> Actually, if we thought we could live with that, my inclination would be
> to blow off int4-based sequences altogether, and just redefine SEQUENCE
> objects as operating on INT8. Interesting thought, eh?
More than interesting ... excellant. Bigger is better, right?
Cheers,
Rod
-- Remove the word 'try' from your vocabulary ... Don't try. Do it or don't do it
... Steers try!
Don Aslett
