Re: anyone seen this weirdness with sequences in 11gr2?

  • From: Andre van Winssen <dreveewee@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:52:18 +0200

I was merely quoting the oracle note. I myself have never relied on order or
consecutiveness of sequences, only their uniqueness per database instance.
this "new" behaviour is unexpected maybe..but makes sense if you read the
story behind the no segment clause and the fact that a value given out by a
sequence can never be stuffed back into the sequence object. workaround: set
deferred_segment_creation=FALSE and this will not happen


2010/4/13 Niall Litchfield <niall.litchfield@xxxxxxxxx>

> That's true, but I for one think it would be nice if they could be relied
> upon to start with the start with value! As Joe says it's a behaviour
> change, and one which is likely to surprise people.
> Niall Litchfield
>  On Apr 13, 2010 8:16 AM, "Andre van Winssen" <dreveewee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> " should not rely on continuity of the values from a
> sequence.Sequences are not guaranteed to generate all consecutive values
> starting with the 'START WITH' value.."
>  2010/4/13 Jared Still <jkstill@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Robert Freeman <
> robertgfreeman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> You on...

Other related posts: