Re: unlogged sequences
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Date: 2022-04-01T00:54:10Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 8:42 PM Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Well, yeah. I did this because the patch was somewhat inconsistent when > handling owned sequences - it updated persistence for owned sequences > when persistence for the table changed, expecting to keep them in sync, > but then it also allowed operations that'd break it. Oops. > But that started a discussion about exactly this, and AFAICS there's > agreement we want to allow the table and owned sequences to have > different persistence values. > > The discussion about the details is still ongoing, but I think it's > clear we'll ditch the restrictions you point out. Great. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Commits
-
Unlogged sequences
- 344d62fb9a97 15.0 landed
-
Preparatory test cleanup
- ae63017bdb31 15.0 landed