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

  1. Unlogged sequences

  2. Preparatory test cleanup