On Thursday 25 January 2007 09:53, Douglas McNaught wrote: > Nature of the beast. Sequence increments aren't rolled back on > transaction abort (for performance and concurrency reasons), so you > should expect gaps. Behavior long ago noted and accounted for. But I've always wondered why this was so? Is there a specific reason for this behavior? -Ben -- "The best way to predict the future is to invent it." - XEROX PARC slogan, circa 1978
