On Oct 22, 2008, at 5:30 PM, Sean Thayne wrote:
I'm pretty sure that if this was the case before, it's definitely
fixed now.
I'm actually a big fan of last_insert_id(), it saves me the time of
having
to check the database for the sequence name and placing another call.
With mysql I can do this
mysqli_query(
"INSERT INTO myCity VALUES (NULL, 'Stuttgart', 'DEU', 'Stuttgart',
617000)"
);
$newId = mysqli_last_insert_id();
Where in Postgres I need extra info
pg_query(
"INSERT INTO myCity VALUES (NULL, 'Stuttgart', 'DEU', 'Stuttgart',
617000)"
);
$sequenceQuery = pg_query("SELECT curval(seq_city_id)");
$result = pg_fetch_assoc($sequenceQuery);
$newId = $result[0];
Seems like extra work for no extra benefit, I've used mysql on large
clusters, and the only thing your need to do is add a auto_increment
offset
to avoid duplicate primary keys, but that's a one time deal. I know
I'm
complaining over an extra two lines of code. But it just seems like
a waste
of time.
First off, those queries are out of order. You want to get the next
value of the sequence first and then use that value in the insert.
As for why this is the case, in general sequences are much more
efficient that auto_increment techniques. It's very easy to make this
separate object (sequence) very fast and efficient. Embedding that
feature in a table requires more work.
It's just different, not something to make a big deal over unless you
are trying to write an app that supports both PostgreSQL and MySQL.
In which case I recommend looking at libraries that specialize in that
sort of thing, like adodb.
It does sound like MySQL added this for their own database, and it's
probally not part of the sql standard, but I think it would be nice
feature
to add to all databases... Unless theirs some reason I'm missing....
--
Joseph Scott
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://joseph.randomnetworks.com/
_______________________________________________
UPHPU mailing list
[email protected]
http://uphpu.org/mailman/listinfo/uphpu
IRC: #uphpu on irc.freenode.net
