[Pgpool-hackers] Idea to handle sequences

[Tatsuo Ishii]

> Actually, Robert Haas has just proposed to add LOCK for non-table
> objects (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-01/msg00472.php).
> Last part of that thread is Robert asking for another use case (there
> are already 2 use cases, not sure how valid they are though).

Interesting. I'll look into the thread and join the discussion if
necessary. Thanks for heading up.

> So, this could be one more use case. Probably you can also ask to keep
> FOR UPDATE, and if core agree on not change current misbehaviour...
> you won't be praising all days that this inconsistency is not found...

Yeah, no way:-) Pgpool-II is fully depending on PostgreSQL
implementation. This often brings us headaches. Sequence is one of
such things. The other is extended protocol design. Probably 1/3 of
time of total pgpool development effort in my company is consumed for
supporting the protocol:-<
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp