Sean Chittenden schrieb:
> That doesn't help you limit the number of rows in the table though
> because what row is going to get "pushed out" of the table? The nifty
> thing about using a wrapping sequence is that the id's are sequential
> across transactions, which correctly maps to the progression of time,
> which obviates the need for relying on any kind of a date column for
> doing syslog message ordering.
>
But isn't that exactly the problem? Once the sequence wraps around how do I
know that id=1 is actually later then id=2 without a date column?
Thomas
