On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 04:57:53PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> FWIW, like Ashutosh upthread, my vote would be to do nothing here in
> terms of behavior changes as this is just breaking a behavior for the
> sake of breaking it, so there are chances that this is going to piss
> some users that relied accidentally on the existing behavior.
In short, I would be tempted with something like the attached, that
documents RESTART in CREATE SEQUENCE, while describing its behavior
according to START. In terms of regression tests, there is already a
lot in this area with ALTER SEQUENCE, but I think that having two
tests makes sense for CREATE SEQUENCE: one for RESTART without a
value and one with, where both explicitely set START.
Thoughts?
--
Michael
