On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:40:54PM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote: > > > I guess - the reason I'm a bit disappointed from the new behavior is that > > we have used Postgresql for more than 10 years and it has never let us > > down. We have been able to improve our product with every new release of > > Postgres. This is the first time for me that a new release of Postgres > > caused some severe headaches among our customers. > > > > OK...but I am not surprised as to how this played out. The system doesn't > expect ALTER SEQUENCE to be executed frequently and your example doesn't > argue for it since setval is indeed provided and can handle the situation > where you wish to skip to some other sequence number for subsequent calls. > > Disruption of existing code is unavoidable since two of the goals of this > project are innovation and stability. That your customers discovered this > particular instance of disruption is more on you than the project - major > upgrades, especially the first few patch releases, don't end up seeing a > wide variety of unusual setups (like this one) until they hit production > since, as it seems here, people with those unusual setups are not putting > it through its paces during the beta release period. > > David J. Hi, I am not trying to be snarky, but it really behooves users to test their systems with a new release before moving to it and not let their unwitting customers be their debug team. :( Regards, Ken
