phoenix-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Taylor <jamestay...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Selecting from a sequence
Date Wed, 09 Apr 2014 06:01:38 GMT
No ticket for the SELECT NEXT VALUE FOR my_seq. Would you mind filing one?


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Dan Di Spaltro <dan.dispaltro@gmail.com>wrote:

> Thanks good idea with using the system table.  Regarding your first
> suggestion James, It's pretty hard to use that when it's basically
> impossible to get the autogenerated value back, that was alluded to in a
> previous thread. Is there a ticket open for this already, I couldn't find
> anything.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Dan
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:27 PM, James Taylor <jamestaylor@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> We should support statements without any FROM clause for cases like this.
>> That way you could do something like this:
>> {code}
>> SELECT NEXT VALUE FOR my_seq;
>> {code}
>> In the meantime, there are a couple of workarounds:
>> - do the NEXT VALUE FOR in the UPSERT statement, as this is the most
>> common use case
>> - use a table where you know there will be rows, like the SYSTEM.SEQUENCE
>> table or the SYSTEM.CATALOG table. Best to put a LIMIT clause on your
>> SELECT so you don't select the entire table each time.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> James
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Dan Di Spaltro <dan.dispaltro@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> So I created a new table and sequence.  My typical pattern for that is
>>> selecting from the sequence using a table, but I noticed if the table is
>>> empty it doesn't select anything.  While in practice this won't really be a
>>> problem but it's a pain when testing, is this intended behavior?
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> -Dan
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dan Di Spaltro
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dan Di Spaltro
>

Mime
View raw message