Thread: Sequence question
Hi,
I have a question about sequences. I need a field to have values with
no holes in the sequence. However, the values do not need to be in order.
My users will draw a number or numbers from the sequence and write to
the field. Sometimes, however, these sequence numbers will be discarded
(after a transaction is complete), and thus available for use. During
the transaction, however, any drawn numbers need to be unavailable.
I would like the next user who draws a number to draw the lowest number
she can, starting with the holes in the sequence.
This continuous sequence is absolutely required by our company, as the
fact that the sequence has no holes is used to check for much more
serious problems.
So my question is:
what's the most effective way to get the next available number?
My present method is to do a query that finds the first and last number
in each of the holes, step through those holes, and then start
generating new numbers. Unfortunately, this involves doing a table scan
each time - before I generate the number, and does not produce the
transaction-safety I want.
Does anyone have any better ideas? Places I should look?
Thanks,
Eric
Hi, On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 01:16, Eric E wrote: > Hi, > I have a question about sequences. I need a field to have values with > no holes in the sequence. However, the values do not need to be in order. > > My users will draw a number or numbers from the sequence and write to > the field. Sometimes, however, these sequence numbers will be discarded > (after a transaction is complete), and thus available for use. During > the transaction, however, any drawn numbers need to be unavailable. > I would like the next user who draws a number to draw the lowest number > she can, starting with the holes in the sequence. > > This continuous sequence is absolutely required by our company, as the > fact that the sequence has no holes is used to check for much more > serious problems. I would recheck this requirement. What should actually be achieved with the check for no holes in the numbering? Remember you can always enumerate using a set returning function or by means of a temporary sequence for a query. > So my question is: > what's the most effective way to get the next available number? There is none. > My present method is to do a query that finds the first and last number > in each of the holes, step through those holes, and then start > generating new numbers. Unfortunately, this involves doing a table scan > each time - before I generate the number, and does not produce the > transaction-safety I want. You cannot eat the cake and keep it - either you have holes or you have transaction security or you have bad performance by locking the whole table on insert. Regards Tino
Hi Tino,
Many thanks for helping me.
I know that the sequence issue is a troubling one for many on the list.
Perhaps if I explain the need for a continuous sequence I can circumvent
some of that:
This database is for a laboratory, and the numbers in sequence
determine storage locations for a sample. Having a physical space in
our storage boxes tells us something has happened - the sample was used
up, broken, in use, etc - and account for that missing sample. If the
generated sequence has holes in it, we cannot tell if a sample is
properly not in the rack, or if that hole was simply generated by the
database. Allowing empties would also fill up limited box space with
spaces generated by the database.
If anyone has a brilliant idea for how a non-continuous sequence could
address the needs, I'd be delighted to hear it, but short of that I
think I have to keep this requirement.
One thought I had, and I'd love to hear what people think of this, is to
build a table of storage location numbers that are available for use.
That way the search for new numbers could be pushed off until some
convenient moment well after the user requests them.
Thanks again for any ideas.
Cheers,
Eric
Tino Wildenhain wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 01:16, Eric E wrote:
>
>
>>Hi,
>> I have a question about sequences. I need a field to have values with
>>no holes in the sequence. However, the values do not need to be in order.
>>
>>My users will draw a number or numbers from the sequence and write to
>>the field. Sometimes, however, these sequence numbers will be discarded
>>(after a transaction is complete), and thus available for use. During
>>the transaction, however, any drawn numbers need to be unavailable.
>>I would like the next user who draws a number to draw the lowest number
>>she can, starting with the holes in the sequence.
>>
>>This continuous sequence is absolutely required by our company, as the
>>fact that the sequence has no holes is used to check for much more
>>serious problems.
>>
>>
>
>I would recheck this requirement. What should actually be achieved
>with the check for no holes in the numbering?
>Remember you can always enumerate using a set returning function
>or by means of a temporary sequence for a query.
>
>
>
>>So my question is:
>>what's the most effective way to get the next available number?
>>
>>
>
>There is none.
>
>
>
>>My present method is to do a query that finds the first and last number
>>in each of the holes, step through those holes, and then start
>>generating new numbers. Unfortunately, this involves doing a table scan
>>each time - before I generate the number, and does not produce the
>>transaction-safety I want.
>>
>>
>
>You cannot eat the cake and keep it - either you have holes
>or you have transaction security or you have bad performance
>by locking the whole table on insert.
>
>Regards
>Tino
>
>
>
>
>
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 01:52:59PM -0400, Eric E wrote:
> One thought I had, and I'd love to hear what people think of this, is to
> build a table of storage location numbers that are available for use.
> That way the search for new numbers could be pushed off until some
> convenient moment well after the user requests them.
That very application is how I heard the idea for the "second method"
I sent in another email. In the case I was thinking of, someone used
it for room allocation. It worked pretty well, as long as you can
tolerate occasional periods where you _do_ have gaps.
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
In the future this spectacle of the middle classes shocking the avant-
garde will probably become the textbook definition of Postmodernism.
--Brad Holland
Hi,
Am Mi, den 20.10.2004 schrieb Eric E um 19:52:
> Hi Tino,
> Many thanks for helping me.
>
> I know that the sequence issue is a troubling one for many on the list.
> Perhaps if I explain the need for a continuous sequence I can circumvent
> some of that:
>
> This database is for a laboratory, and the numbers in sequence
> determine storage locations for a sample. Having a physical space in
> our storage boxes tells us something has happened - the sample was used
> up, broken, in use, etc - and account for that missing sample. If the
> generated sequence has holes in it, we cannot tell if a sample is
> properly not in the rack, or if that hole was simply generated by the
> database. Allowing empties would also fill up limited box space with
> spaces generated by the database.
> If anyone has a brilliant idea for how a non-continuous sequence could
> address the needs, I'd be delighted to hear it, but short of that I
> think I have to keep this requirement.
Maybe you skip the sequence thingy alltogether in this case and
use an approach like this:
initialize a table with all possible locations and mark them
as empty.
CREATE TABLE locations (location_id int2,taken bool);
(you might want to have a timestamp for changes too)
Whenever you change state of a location, do it like this
(perhaps in a function)
SELECT INTO loc_id location_id FROM locations WHERE taken
FOR UPDATE;
IF FOUND THEN
UPDATE location SET taken=true WHERE location_id=loc_id;
ELSE
RAISE EXCEPTION 'no free location anymore';
...
AND the other way round for freeing a location.
The SELECT ... FOR UPDATE should lock the candidate
position in the table so concurrent
transactions have to wait then then find another
free cell when they wake up.
Advantage: not a full table scan. Only the first
matching row should be used and locked.
Not this is only a rough sketch and you should
look for the actual syntax and more flesh for
the function.
Regards
Tino
Hmm.... that's a really intesting idea, Tino. Since we're probably talking about 1000000 numbers max, a query on this table would work fairly fast, and operationally simple. I'll think about that. Thanks, Eric Tino Wildenhain wrote: >Hi, > >Am Mi, den 20.10.2004 schrieb Eric E um 19:52: > > >>Hi Tino, >> Many thanks for helping me. >> >>I know that the sequence issue is a troubling one for many on the list. >>Perhaps if I explain the need for a continuous sequence I can circumvent >>some of that: >> >> This database is for a laboratory, and the numbers in sequence >>determine storage locations for a sample. Having a physical space in >>our storage boxes tells us something has happened - the sample was used >>up, broken, in use, etc - and account for that missing sample. If the >>generated sequence has holes in it, we cannot tell if a sample is >>properly not in the rack, or if that hole was simply generated by the >>database. Allowing empties would also fill up limited box space with >>spaces generated by the database. >>If anyone has a brilliant idea for how a non-continuous sequence could >>address the needs, I'd be delighted to hear it, but short of that I >>think I have to keep this requirement. >> >> > >Maybe you skip the sequence thingy alltogether in this case and >use an approach like this: > >initialize a table with all possible locations and mark them >as empty. > >CREATE TABLE locations (location_id int2,taken bool); > >(you might want to have a timestamp for changes too) > >Whenever you change state of a location, do it like this >(perhaps in a function) > >SELECT INTO loc_id location_id FROM locations WHERE taken > FOR UPDATE; >IF FOUND THEN > UPDATE location SET taken=true WHERE location_id=loc_id; >ELSE > RAISE EXCEPTION 'no free location anymore'; > >... > >AND the other way round for freeing a location. >The SELECT ... FOR UPDATE should lock the candidate >position in the table so concurrent >transactions have to wait then then find another >free cell when they wake up. > >Advantage: not a full table scan. Only the first >matching row should be used and locked. > >Not this is only a rough sketch and you should >look for the actual syntax and more flesh for >the function. > >Regards >Tino > > > >