On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I'm not worried about the size of the return type of
> > a sequence, but I like the idea of Oracle-compatible
> > "seq.nextval" syntax.
>
> I didn't realize we had any Oracle-compatibility issues here. What
> exactly does Oracle's sequence facility look li
Matthew Kirkwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not worried about the size of the return type of
> a sequence, but I like the idea of Oracle-compatible
> "seq.nextval" syntax.
I didn't realize we had any Oracle-compatibility issues here. What
exactly does Oracle's sequence facility look like?
On Mon, 6 Aug 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> * How should one invoke nextval() and friends on such a sequence?
> Perhaps we could allow people to write nextval(sequencename) and/or
> sequencename.nextval, which would expose the sequence object to the
> parser so that datatype overloading could occur.
I have been thinking about implementing int8-based sequences to go along
with the existing int4-based ones. The amount of code involved doesn't
seem very large, but there are some interesting questions about the API.
Some points for discussion:
* On machines that don't offer an 8-byte-int C data
