On Thu, January 17, 2008 10:15, Scott Marlowe wrote:
If race conditions are a possible issue, you use a sequence and
increment that until you get a number that isn't used. That way two
clients connecting at the same time can get different, available
numbers.
That is close to the idea that
On Jan 17, 2008 9:05 AM, James B. Byrne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the entries involved numbered in the millions then Scott's approach has
considerable merit. In my case, as the rate of additions is very low and
the size of the existing blocks is in the hundreds rather than hundreds of
On Wed, January 16, 2008 18:40, Scott Marlowe wrote:
You're essentially wanting to fill in the blanks here. If you need
good performance, then what you'll need to do is to preallocate all
the numbers that haven't been assigned somewhere. So, we make a table
something like:
create table
On Jan 17, 2008 9:19 AM, James B. Byrne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, January 17, 2008 10:15, Scott Marlowe wrote:
If race conditions are a possible issue, you use a sequence and
increment that until you get a number that isn't used. That way two
clients connecting at the same time
On Jan 17, 2008 9:19 AM, James B. Byrne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, January 17, 2008 10:15, Scott Marlowe wrote:
If race conditions are a possible issue, you use a sequence and
increment that until you get a number that isn't used. That way two
clients connecting at the same time
On Thu, January 17, 2008 11:48, Scott Marlowe wrote:
Got bored, hacked this aggregious pl/pgsql routine up. It looks
horrible, but I wanted it to be able to use indexes. Seems to work.
Test has ~750k rows and returns in it and returns a new id in 1ms
on my little server.
File attached.
I am prototyping a system migration that is to employ Ruby, Rails and
PostgreSQL. Rails has the convention that the primary key of a row is an
arbitrary integer value assigned by the database manager through a
sequence. As it turns out, the legacy application employs essentially the
same
On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 11:43:54AM -0500, James B. Byrne wrote:
My question is this: Can one assign an id number to a sequenced key column
on create and override the sequencer? If one does this then can and, if
so, how does the sequencer in Postgresql handle the eventuality of running
into a
On Jan 11, 2008 10:43 AM, James B. Byrne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am prototyping a system migration that is to employ Ruby, Rails and
PostgreSQL. Rails has the convention that the primary key of a row is an
arbitrary integer value assigned by the database manager through a
sequence. As it
