Re: BUG #15198: nextval() accepts tables/indexes when adding a default to a column
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Feike Steenbergen <feikesteenbergen@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2018-05-17T16:21:19Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Hi, On 2018-05-17 08:41:53 +0200, Feike Steenbergen wrote: > On 16 May 2018 at 16:20, Peter Eisentraut > <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > In this case, they are putting the erroneous call into a column default, > > so the difference ends up being getting the error at setup time versus > > at run time, which is a difference of significance. > > Yes, I'm not particularly concerned with nextval taking a regclass as > an argument, and > therefore raising this error, but I'd rather have this error at DDL > time than at DML time. > > I don't know how hard it would be to implement, but say, calling > currval(regclass) when > a default is defined should already throw this error at DDL time. > > Or, when registering the default in the catalog, we verify that it is > actually a sequence: These alternatives seem like they're not an improvement. I don't think it's worth doing anything here. Greetings, Andres Freund