Re: sequences implementation for DB/pgsql

Should we be setting a default standard for sequences? If we specify an append of _seq for all sequences, then don't we break compatibility with current databases, and make life very hard for those who use other languages to connect to the same database? Thanks. Peter On Wed, 13 Dec 2000, Stig S. Bakken wrote: > Alexey Borzov wrote: > > > > Greetings! > > > > I've decided to give PEAR::DB a test and immediately noticed > > that DB_pgsql lacks sequence support. > > So I copied an implementation from DB_mysql and redone it for native > > Postgres sequences. > > The functions are tested and work as intended: > > 1) if a sequence exists, nextId is returned, > > 2) if it doesn't exist - it gets created, > > 3) if it cannot be created - an error is returned (I tested with the > > sequence names that begin with 'pg_' prefix, which is reserved for > > system catalogs). > > The functions are formatted in accordance with the "latest > > standard", PHPDoc comments are added, blah-blah-blah > > So you can just commit them into CVS. ;] > > Hi Alexey, > > I have sequences implemented in my local checkout, but I rewrote some > error handling stuff at the same time that broke a few tests, so it's > not committed yet. :-) I didn't append "_seq" to the actual sequence > names though, it's probably a good idea, so I'll add that. Thanks. > > - Stig > >