Bill Moran <wmoran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > And yes, it's pretty much guaranteed to be slower than built in sequences, with > blocking when multiple threads want a sequence all at the same time. It's also going to create a vacuum bottleneck unless the insert rate is quite low, because each ID assignment will create another dead row in the sequence management table. > I'm rather concerned by the third column, as I'm not sure what his implementation > approach is, and I'm concerned that he's using a home-brewed locking mechanism > instead of using table locks. Indeed, that looks a bit scary/pointless. You could at least use SELECT FOR UPDATE to lock the rows. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
