James David Smith, 03.08.2012 15:59:
> DROP TABLE IF EXISTS test;
> DROP SEQUENCE IF EXISTS serial;
> CREATE TABLE test(
> id INTEGER,
> date_time TIMESTAMP);
> INSERT INTO test (id, date_time)
> VALUES
> ('1', '2012-07-12 10:00:00'),
> ('2', '2012-07-12 10:00:01'),
> ('3', '2012-07-12 10:00:02'),
> ('4', '2012-07-12 10:00:03'),
> ('5', '2012-07-12 10:00:04'),
> ('6', '2012-07-12 10:00:05');
> CREATE SEQUENCE serial start 1;
> SELECT id, date_time, nextval('serial') as serial
> FROM test
> ORDER BY date_time DESC;
> _______________
> The result of the select query is below. What I don't understand is why isn't the sequence going from 1-6? It seems
tohave used it the wrong way around. I guess it gets the data, does the serial, and then does the order. I don't want
itto do this. Is there some way to get the sequence to generate itself while respecting the order of the select
statement?
> id | date_time | serial
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> 6 | 2012-07-12 10:00:05 | 6
> 5 | 2012-07-12 10:00:04 | 5
> 4 | 2012-07-12 10:00:03 | 4
> 3 | 2012-07-12 10:00:02 | 3
> 2 | 2012-07-12 10:00:01 | 2
> 1 | 2012-07-12 10:00:00 | 1
> Thanks
> James
My assumption is, that the rows are first retrieved from the table (including the "generation" of the sequence numbers
usingnextval()
That order is not specified.
Then, once those rows are retrieved, they are sorted. As it happens just the other way round in which they were
retrieved.
If you do some updates/deletes/inserts into the table you _could_ wind up with something like this:
id | date_time | serial
------------------------------------------------------------
6 | 2012-07-12 10:00:05 | 3
5 | 2012-07-12 10:00:04 | 5
4 | 2012-07-12 10:00:03 | 6
3 | 2012-07-12 10:00:02 | 1
2 | 2012-07-12 10:00:01 | 4
1 | 2012-07-12 10:00:00 | 2
If you need to have a (guaranteed) consecutive numbering in your result set, use row_number():
SELECT id, date_time, row_number() over (order by date_time ASC) as serial
FROM test
ORDER BY date_time DESC;
