As others have said, sequences can have gaps. In fact, the thought of a gap-free sequence is scary to me. Unless you do very few inserts, "gap-free sequence" is pretty much synonymous with "not scalable". If your goal is to generate a unique number for each row (which is usually the case), then gaps should be fine. Though I must admit I have occasionally wished for sequences with a GAPFREE option...For small, static look-up tables that I update once in a blue moon. It's just easier on the eyes to have 1,2,3,4,5 than 1, 25, 2405, 95720, 59028598253. Mark On Jan 31, 7:43 am, esote...@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Geoffrey) wrote: > We are trying to track down an issue with our PostgreSQL application. > We are running PostgreSQL 7.4.13 on Red Hat Enterprise ES 3. > > We have a situation where the postgres backend process drops core and > dies. We've tracked this to an unusual situation where a sequence value > that is being created during the process that is causing the core file > generation. The thing that is bizarre is that the sequence value skips > 30+ entries. > > How is this even possible? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. > > -- > Until later, Geoffrey
