Re: Stupidity or sequences?
- From: Nuno Souto <dbvision@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 00:03:52 +1000
Bingo! Basically, the idea is to use the INSERT to grab a gapless
series and stash it away for later use, either by the original session
or another that "cleans up" later if original fails for whatever
reason. As in: grab a sequence of numbers to be used in serialising
documents/cheques/invoices/whatever physical representation is needed.
In a fashion that avoids serial loss if serializing session fails.
Of course, just like you said: it's all about what the needs are. In
most cases where gapless is not needed, a simple Oracle sequence will do
the job nicely and without major convolutions.
--
Cheers
Nuno Souto
dbvision@xxxxxxxxxxxx
On 13/04/2013 8:21 PM, Hans Forbrich wrote:
> On 12/04/2013 11:56 PM, Nuno Souto wrote:
>> One way I've seen is to generate them in a single INSERT into a
>> table_of_pending_cheques (topc) statement, using a sequence . This
>> guarantees the serial numbering and by committing after the INSERT,
> Which lifts at least part of the 'concurrency' issue, by placing the
> insert into a single session.
>
> The challenge is to define the requirements properly, to understand what
> is required - uniqueness or [gapless] serialization or ... - and code
> against that. :-)
>
>
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
