On 8/19/20 3:24 PM, Shantanu Shekhar wrote:
Please reply to list also.
Ccing list.
Thanks Adrian,
I will reach out to the ORM team and see if they can help me understand
this behavior.
I should have asked earlier, is this sequence set as a DEFAULT on the PK
field or is it just being used by code to get numbers?
Shantanu
On Wednesday, August 19, 2020, 06:20:27 PM EDT, Adrian Klaver
<adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 8/19/20 3:15 PM, Shantanu Shekhar wrote:
> Team,
>
> I have a sequence definition in Postgres 9.6.11 like so:
>
> CREATE SEQUENCE IF NOT EXISTS org.my_seq
> INCREMENT 1
> MINVALUE 1
> NO MAXVALUE
> START 1
> CACHE 20;
>
> This sequence is used by a Java ORM framework to generate primary keys
> for one of our tables. The initial numbers generated by this sequence
> are as shown below:
>
> -28 -27 -26 -25 -8 -7 1 2 52 53 72 92 93 94 112 113 132 133 152 172 192
> 193 212
>
> I am unable to understand why the sequence would start with a negative
> number, particularly when the definition explicitly asks the sequence to
> start at 1. This has happened consistently in all of our environments.
Because something in the ORM is generating negative numbers and
supplying then directly to the PK field.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Shantanu
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx
