Sequence in postgresql - postgresql

Converting below SQL Server procedures and tables to store and generate sequence to postgresql.
Can anyone guide how to do this in Postgres (via table and this function) and not via sequence or nextval or currval
Sequence table
IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT name FROM sys.tables WHERE name = 'testtable')
    CREATE TABLE dbo.testtable(Sequence int NOT NULL )
go
IF NOT EXISTS (SELECT * FROM testtable)
    INSERT INTO testtable VALUES (-2147483648) 
go 
Sequence generating proc
CREATE PROCEDURE test_proc
AS
SET NOCOUNT ON
DECLARE #iReturn int
BEGIN TRANSACTION
SELECT #iReturn = Sequence FROM schema.test (TABLOCKX) -- set exclusive table lock 
UPDATE schema.test SET Sequence = ( Sequence + 1 )
COMMIT TRANSACTION
SELECT #iReturn
RETURN #iReturn 
go 
grant execute on schema.test to public 
go

Disclaimer: using a sequence is the only scalable and efficient way to generate unique numbers.
Having said that, it is possible to implement your own sequence generator. The only situation where makes any sense is, if you are required to generate gapless numbers. If you do not have such a requirement, use a sequence.
You need one table that stores the values of the sequences. I usually use one table with a row for each "generator" that avoids costly table locks.
create table seq_generator
(
entity varchar(30) not null primary key,
seq_value integer default 0 not null
);
insert into seq_generator (entity) values ('testsequence');
Then create a function to increment the sequence value:
create or replace function next_value(p_entity varchar)
returns integer
as
$$
update seq_generator
set seq_value = seq_value + 1
where entity = lower(p_entity)
returning seq_value;
$$
language sql;
To obtain the next sequence value, e.g. inside an insert:
insert into some_table
(id, ...)
values
(next_value('testsequence'), ...);
Or make it a default value:
create table some_table
(
id integer not null primary key default next_value('testsequence'),
...
);
The UPDATE increments and locks the row in a single statement returning the new value for the sequence. If the calling transaction commits, the update to seq_generator will also be committed. If the calling transaction rolls back, the update will roll back as well.
If a second transaction calls next_value() for the same entity, it has to wait until the first transaction commits or rolls back.
So access to the generator is serialized through this function. Only one transaction at a time can do that.
If you need a second gapless sequence, just insert a new row in the `seq_generator' table.
This will seriously affect performance when you use in an environment that does a lot of concurrent inserts.
The only reason that would justify this is a legal requirement to have a gapless number. In every other case you should really, really use a native Postgres sequence.

Related

How to upgrade table inside a trigger function in POSTGRESQL?

I would like to create a trigger function inside my database which checks, if the newly "inserted" value (max_bid) is at least +1 greater than the largest max_bid value currently in the table.
If this is the case, the max_bid value inside the table should be updated, although not with the newly "inserted" value, but instead it should be increased by 1.
For instance, if max_bid is 10 and the newly "inserted" max_bid is 20, the max_bid value inside the table should be increased by +1 (in this case 11).
I tried to do it with a trigger, but unfortunatelly it doesn't work. Please help me to solve this problem.
Here is my code:
CREATE TABLE bidtable (
mail_buyer VARCHAR(80) NOT NULL,
auction_id INTEGER NOT NULL,
max_bid INTEGER,
PRIMARY KEY (mail_buyer),
);
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION max_bid()
RETURNS TRIGGER LANGUAGE PLPGSQL AS $$
DECLARE
current_maxbid INTEGER;
BEGIN
SELECT MAX(max_bid) INTO current_maxbid
FROM bidtable WHERE NEW.auction_id = OLD.auction_id;
IF (NEW.max_bid < (current_maxbid + 1)) THEN
RAISE EXCEPTION 'error';
RETURN NULL;
END IF;
UPDATE bidtable SET max_bid = (current_maxbid + 1)
WHERE NEW.auction_id = OLD.auction_id
AND NEW.mail_buyer = OLD.mail_buyer;
RETURN NEW;
END;
$$;
CREATE OR REPLACE TRIGGER max_bid_trigger
BEFORE INSERT
ON bidtable
FOR EACH ROW
EXECUTE PROCEDURE max_bid();
Thank you very much for your help.
In a trigger function that is called for an INSERT operation the OLD implicit record variable is null, which is probably the cause of "unfortunately it doesn't work".
Trigger function
In a case like this there is a much easier solution. First of all, disregard the value for max_bid upon input because you require a specific value in all cases. Instead, you are going to set it to that specific value in the function. The trigger function can then be simplified to:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION set_max_bid() -- Function name different from column name
RETURNS TRIGGER LANGUAGE PLPGSQL AS $$
BEGIN
SELECT MAX(max_bid) + 1 INTO NEW.max_bid
FROM bidtable
WHERE auction_id = NEW.auction_id;
RETURN NEW;
END; $$;
That's all there is to it for the trigger function. Update the trigger to the new function name and it should work.
Concurrency
As several comments to your question pointed out, you run the risk of getting duplicates. This will currently not generate an error because you do not have an appropriate constraint on your table. Avoiding duplicates requires a table constraint like:
UNIQUE (auction_id, max_bid)
You cannot deal with any concurrency issue in the trigger function because the INSERT operation will take place after the trigger function completes with a RETURN NEW statement. What would be the most appropriate way to deal with this depends on your application. Your options are table locking to block any concurrent inserts, or looping in a function until the insert succeeds.
Avoid the concurrency issue altogether
If you can change the structure of the bidtable table, you can get rid of the whole concurrency issue by changing your business logic to not require the max_bid column. The max_bid column appears to indicate the order in which bids were placed for each auction_id. If that is the case then you could add a serial column to your table and use that to indicate order of bids being placed (for all auctions). That serial column could then also be the PRIMARY KEY to make your table more agile (no indexing on a large text column). The table would look something like this:
CREATE TABLE bidtable (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
mail_buyer VARCHAR(80) NOT NULL,
auction_id INTEGER NOT NULL
);
You can drop your trigger and trigger function and just depend on the proper id value being supplied by the system.
The bids for a specific action can then be extracted using a straightforward SELECT:
SELECT id, mail_buyer
FROM bidtable
WHERE auction_id = xxx
ORDER BY id;
If you require a max_bid-like value (the id values increment over the full set of auctions), you can use a simple window function:
SELECT mail_buyer, row_number() AS max_bid OVER (PARTITION BY auction_id ORDER BY id)
FROM bidtable
WHERE auction_id = xxx;

Serial id next value not getting sequential after failed insert attempt [duplicate]

I'm moving from MySql to Postgres, and I noticed that when you delete rows from MySql, the unique ids for those rows are re-used when you make new ones. With Postgres, if you create rows, and delete them, the unique ids are not used again.
Is there a reason for this behaviour in Postgres? Can I make it act more like MySql in this case?
Sequences have gaps to permit concurrent inserts. Attempting to avoid gaps or to re-use deleted IDs creates horrible performance problems. See the PostgreSQL wiki FAQ.
PostgreSQL SEQUENCEs are used to allocate IDs. These only ever increase, and they're exempt from the usual transaction rollback rules to permit multiple transactions to grab new IDs at the same time. This means that if a transaction rolls back, those IDs are "thrown away"; there's no list of "free" IDs kept, just the current ID counter. Sequences are also usually incremented if the database shuts down uncleanly.
Synthetic keys (IDs) are meaningless anyway. Their order is not significant, their only property of significance is uniqueness. You can't meaningfully measure how "far apart" two IDs are, nor can you meaningfully say if one is greater or less than another. All you can do is say "equal" or "not equal". Anything else is unsafe. You shouldn't care about gaps.
If you need a gapless sequence that re-uses deleted IDs, you can have one, you just have to give up a huge amount of performance for it - in particular, you cannot have any concurrency on INSERTs at all, because you have to scan the table for the lowest free ID, locking the table for write so no other transaction can claim the same ID. Try searching for "postgresql gapless sequence".
The simplest approach is to use a counter table and a function that gets the next ID. Here's a generalized version that uses a counter table to generate consecutive gapless IDs; it doesn't re-use IDs, though.
CREATE TABLE thetable_id_counter ( last_id integer not null );
INSERT INTO thetable_id_counter VALUES (0);
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION get_next_id(countertable regclass, countercolumn text) RETURNS integer AS $$
DECLARE
next_value integer;
BEGIN
EXECUTE format('UPDATE %s SET %I = %I + 1 RETURNING %I', countertable, countercolumn, countercolumn, countercolumn) INTO next_value;
RETURN next_value;
END;
$$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
COMMENT ON get_next_id(countername regclass) IS 'Increment and return value from integer column $2 in table $1';
Usage:
INSERT INTO dummy(id, blah)
VALUES ( get_next_id('thetable_id_counter','last_id'), 42 );
Note that when one open transaction has obtained an ID, all other transactions that try to call get_next_id will block until the 1st transaction commits or rolls back. This is unavoidable and for gapless IDs and is by design.
If you want to store multiple counters for different purposes in a table, just add a parameter to the above function, add a column to the counter table, and add a WHERE clause to the UPDATE that matches the parameter to the added column. That way you can have multiple independently-locked counter rows. Do not just add extra columns for new counters.
This function does not re-use deleted IDs, it just avoids introducing gaps.
To re-use IDs I advise ... not re-using IDs.
If you really must, you can do so by adding an ON INSERT OR UPDATE OR DELETE trigger on the table of interest that adds deleted IDs to a free-list side table, and removes them from the free-list table when they're INSERTed. Treat an UPDATE as a DELETE followed by an INSERT. Now modify the ID generation function above so that it does a SELECT free_id INTO next_value FROM free_ids FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1 and if found, DELETEs that row. IF NOT FOUND gets a new ID from the generator table as normal. Here's an untested extension of the prior function to support re-use:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION get_next_id_reuse(countertable regclass, countercolumn text, freelisttable regclass, freelistcolumn text) RETURNS integer AS $$
DECLARE
next_value integer;
BEGIN
EXECUTE format('SELECT %I FROM %s FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1', freelistcolumn, freelisttable) INTO next_value;
IF next_value IS NOT NULL THEN
EXECUTE format('DELETE FROM %s WHERE %I = %L', freelisttable, freelistcolumn, next_value);
ELSE
EXECUTE format('UPDATE %s SET %I = %I + 1 RETURNING %I', countertable, countercolumn, countercolumn, countercolumn) INTO next_value;
END IF;
RETURN next_value;
END;
$$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;

Auto increment depending on value of column in PostgreSQL

The question follows, can I auto increment (verification_number) depending on a value of a specific column (here business_uuid) so that verification_number increments by one (1) depending on that business_uuid's own highest number of verification_number?
Database looks as follows:
table: verification
verification_id = integer, sequence (Primary Key)
business_uuid = text
verification_number = integer
The verification_id is the Primary Key in this table and I want the verification_number to follow it's own auto increment depending on what it's highest value is filtered only for business_uuid.
The business_uuid is a unique identifier for each business.
Is it possible?
I think that this is a bad design, but if you really want that, you can achieve it as follows:
Create a unique constraint:
ALTER TABLE verification
ADD CONSTRAINT verification_uuid_nr_unique
UNIQUE (business_uuid, verification_number);
The index created by this will also make the following trigger function faster.
Create a BEFORE trigger to modify verification_number:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION veritrig() RETURNS trigger
LANGUAGE plpgsql AS
$$BEGIN
SELECT COALESCE(max(verification_number)+1, 1) INTO NEW.verification_number
FROM verification
WHERE business_uuid = NEW.business_uuid;
RETURN NEW;
END;$$;
CREATE TRIGGER veritrig
BEFORE INSERT OR UPDATE ON verification FOR EACH ROW
EXECUTE PROCEDURE veritrig();
Insert new values like this:
INSERT INTO verification (business_uuid) VALUES ('42');
Then verification_number will be set as you desire.
There is a problem with concurrency, however.
If several sessions try to insert or update the table concurrently, you will get an error like this:
ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique constraint "verification_uuid_nr_unique"
DETAIL: Key (business_uuid, verification_number)=(43, 1) already exists.
That is because the SELECT statements in concurrent modifications will only see the current (committed) table contents and may erroneously try to insert the same verification_number for a business_uuid.
There is no way to avoid that short of locking the table. But if you receive such an error, you can simply retry the transaction, and odds are that it will work the next time.
It is not clear if you want the verification_number to be saved to the table but it is possible to create it at query time:
select verification_id, business_uuid,
row_number() over(
partition by business_uuid
order by verification_id
) as verification_number
from verification
The problem with the above approach is that the verification_number will change if rows are deleted
Window functions
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION public.creaid(
IN key_field text,
IN table_mane text,
OUT id integer)
RETURNS integer AS
$BODY$
DECLARE maxid INT;
BEGIN
EXECUTE 'SELECT max('||key_field||') FROM '||table_name INTO maxid;
IF maxid IS NULL THEN
id = 1;
ELSE
id = maxid + 1;
END IF;
END;
$BODY$
LANGUAGE plpgsql VOLATILE
COST 100;
Then, you can call that function as a default value of every key value of every table of your database, as follows:
DEFAULT creaid('key_field'::text, 'table_name'::text)

PostgreSQL, triggers, and concurrency to enforce a temporal key

I want to define a trigger in PostgreSQL to check that the inserted row, on a generic table, has the the property: "no other row exists with the same key in the same valid time" (the keys are sequenced keys). In fact, I has already implemented it. But since the trigger has to scan the entire table, now i'm wondering: is there a need for a table-level lock? Or this is managed someway by the PostgreSQL itself?
Here is an example.
In the upcoming PostgreSQL 9.0 I would have defined the table in this way:
CREATE TABLE medicinal_products
(
aic_code CHAR(9), -- sequenced key
full_name VARCHAR(255),
market_time PERIOD,
EXCLUDE USING gist
(aic_code CHECK WITH =,
market_time CHECK WITH &&)
);
but in fact I have been defined it like this:
CREATE TABLE medicinal_products
(
PRIMARY KEY (aic_code, vs),
aic_code CHAR(9), -- sequenced key
full_name VARCHAR(255),
vs DATE NOT NULL,
ve DATE,
CONSTRAINT valid_time_range
CHECK (ve > vs OR ve IS NULL)
);
Then, I have written a trigger that check the costraint: "two distinct medicinal products can have the same code in two different periods, but not in same time".
So the code:
INSERT INTO medicinal_products VALUES ('1','A','2010-01-01','2010-04-01');
INSERT INTO medicinal_products VALUES ('1','A','2010-03-01','2010-06-01');
return an error.
One solution is to have a second table to use for detecting clashes, and populate that with a trigger. Using the schema you added into the question:
CREATE TABLE medicinal_product_date_map(
aic_code char(9) NOT NULL,
applicable_date date NOT NULL,
UNIQUE(aic_code, applicable_date));
(note: this is the second attempt due to misreading your requirement the first time round. hope it's right this time).
Some functions to maintain this table:
CREATE FUNCTION add_medicinal_product_date_range(aic_code_in char(9), start_date date, end_date date)
RETURNS void STRICT VOLATILE LANGUAGE sql AS $$
INSERT INTO medicinal_product_date_map
SELECT $1, $2 + offset
FROM generate_series(0, $3 - $2)
$$;
CREATE FUNCTION clr_medicinal_product_date_range(aic_code_in char(9), start_date date, end_date date)
RETURNS void STRICT VOLATILE LANGUAGE sql AS $$
DELETE FROM medicinal_product_date_map
WHERE aic_code = $1 AND applicable_date BETWEEN $2 AND $3
$$;
And populate the table first time with:
SELECT count(add_medicinal_product_date_range(aic_code, vs, ve))
FROM medicinal_products;
Now create triggers to populate the date map after changes to medicinal_products: after insert calls add_, after update calls clr_ (old values) and add_ (new values), after delete calls clr_.
CREATE FUNCTION sync_medicinal_product_date_map()
RETURNS trigger LANGUAGE plpgsql AS $$
BEGIN
IF TG_OP = 'UPDATE' OR TG_OP = 'DELETE' THEN
PERFORM clr_medicinal_product_date_range(OLD.aic_code, OLD.vs, OLD.ve);
END IF;
IF TG_OP = 'UPDATE' OR TG_OP = 'INSERT' THEN
PERFORM add_medicinal_product_date_range(NEW.aic_code, NEW.vs, NEW.ve);
END IF;
RETURN NULL;
END;
$$;
CREATE TRIGGER sync_date_map
AFTER INSERT OR UPDATE OR DELETE ON medicinal_products
FOR EACH ROW EXECUTE PROCEDURE sync_medicinal_product_date_map();
The uniqueness constraint on medicinal_product_date_map will trap any products being added with the same code on the same day:
steve#steve#[local] =# INSERT INTO medicinal_products VALUES ('1','A','2010-01-01','2010-04-01');
INSERT 0 1
steve#steve#[local] =# INSERT INTO medicinal_products VALUES ('1','A','2010-03-01','2010-06-01');
ERROR: duplicate key value violates unique constraint "medicinal_product_date_map_aic_code_applicable_date_key"
DETAIL: Key (aic_code, applicable_date)=(1 , 2010-03-01) already exists.
CONTEXT: SQL function "add_medicinal_product_date_range" statement 1
SQL statement "SELECT add_medicinal_product_date_range(NEW.aic_code, NEW.vs, NEW.ve)"
PL/pgSQL function "sync_medicinal_product_date_map" line 6 at PERFORM
This depends on the values being checked for having a discrete space- which is why I asked about dates vs timestamps. Although timestamps are, technically, discrete since Postgresql only stores microsecond-resolution, adding an entry to the map table for every microsecond the product is applicable for is not practical.
Having said that, you could probably also get away with something better than a full-table scan to check for overlapping timestamp intervals, with some trickery on looking for only the first interval not after or not before... however, for easy discrete spaces I prefer this approach which IME can also be handy for other things too (e.g. reports that need to quickly find which products are applicable on a certain day).
I also like this approach because it feels right to leverage the database's uniqueness-constraint mechanism this way. Also, I feel it will be more reliable in the context of concurrent updates to the master table: without locking the table against concurrent updates, it would be possible for a validation trigger to see no conflict and allow inserts in two concurrent sessions, that are then seen to conflict when both transaction's effects are visible.
Just a thought, in case the valid time blocks could be coded with a number or something, creating a UNIQUE index on Id+TimeBlock would be blazingly fast and resolve all table lock problems.
It is managed by PostgreSQL itself. On a select it acquires an ACCESS_SHARE lock which means that you can query the table but do not perform updates.
A radical solution which might help you is to use a cache like ehcache or memcached to store the id/timeblock info and not use the postgresql at all. Many can be persisted so they would survive a server restart and they do not exhibit this locking behavior.
Why can't you use a UNIQUE constraint? Will be much faster (it's an index) and easier.

PostgreSQL function for last inserted ID

In PostgreSQL, how do I get the last id inserted into a table?
In MS SQL there is SCOPE_IDENTITY().
Please do not advise me to use something like this:
select max(id) from table
( tl;dr : goto option 3: INSERT with RETURNING )
Recall that in postgresql there is no "id" concept for tables, just sequences (which are typically but not necessarily used as default values for surrogate primary keys, with the SERIAL pseudo-type).
If you are interested in getting the id of a newly inserted row, there are several ways:
Option 1: CURRVAL(<sequence name>);.
For example:
INSERT INTO persons (lastname,firstname) VALUES ('Smith', 'John');
SELECT currval('persons_id_seq');
The name of the sequence must be known, it's really arbitrary; in this example we assume that the table persons has an id column created with the SERIAL pseudo-type. To avoid relying on this and to feel more clean, you can use instead pg_get_serial_sequence:
INSERT INTO persons (lastname,firstname) VALUES ('Smith', 'John');
SELECT currval(pg_get_serial_sequence('persons','id'));
Caveat: currval() only works after an INSERT (which has executed nextval() ), in the same session.
Option 2: LASTVAL();
This is similar to the previous, only that you don't need to specify the sequence name: it looks for the most recent modified sequence (always inside your session, same caveat as above).
Both CURRVAL and LASTVAL are totally concurrent safe. The behaviour of sequence in PG is designed so that different session will not interfere, so there is no risk of race conditions (if another session inserts another row between my INSERT and my SELECT, I still get my correct value).
However they do have a subtle potential problem. If the database has some TRIGGER (or RULE) that, on insertion into persons table, makes some extra insertions in other tables... then LASTVAL will probably give us the wrong value. The problem can even happen with CURRVAL, if the extra insertions are done intto the same persons table (this is much less usual, but the risk still exists).
Option 3: INSERT with RETURNING
INSERT INTO persons (lastname,firstname) VALUES ('Smith', 'John') RETURNING id;
This is the most clean, efficient and safe way to get the id. It doesn't have any of the risks of the previous.
Drawbacks? Almost none: you might need to modify the way you call your INSERT statement (in the worst case, perhaps your API or DB layer does not expect an INSERT to return a value); it's not standard SQL (who cares); it's available since Postgresql 8.2 (Dec 2006...)
Conclusion: If you can, go for option 3. Elsewhere, prefer 1.
Note: all these methods are useless if you intend to get the last inserted id globally (not necessarily by your session). For this, you must resort to SELECT max(id) FROM table (of course, this will not read uncommitted inserts from other transactions).
Conversely, you should never use SELECT max(id) FROM table instead one of the 3 options above, to get the id just generated by your INSERT statement, because (apart from performance) this is not concurrent safe: between your INSERT and your SELECT another session might have inserted another record.
See the RETURNING clause of the INSERT statement. Basically, the INSERT doubles as a query and gives you back the value that was inserted.
Leonbloy's answer is quite complete. I would only add the special case in which one needs to get the last inserted value from within a PL/pgSQL function where OPTION 3 doesn't fit exactly.
For example, if we have the following tables:
CREATE TABLE person(
id serial,
lastname character varying (50),
firstname character varying (50),
CONSTRAINT person_pk PRIMARY KEY (id)
);
CREATE TABLE client (
id integer,
CONSTRAINT client_pk PRIMARY KEY (id),
CONSTRAINT fk_client_person FOREIGN KEY (id)
REFERENCES person (id) MATCH SIMPLE
);
If we need to insert a client record we must refer to a person record. But let's say we want to devise a PL/pgSQL function that inserts a new record into client but also takes care of inserting the new person record. For that, we must use a slight variation of leonbloy's OPTION 3:
INSERT INTO person(lastname, firstname)
VALUES (lastn, firstn)
RETURNING id INTO [new_variable];
Note that there are two INTO clauses. Therefore, the PL/pgSQL function would be defined like:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION new_client(lastn character varying, firstn character varying)
RETURNS integer AS
$BODY$
DECLARE
v_id integer;
BEGIN
-- Inserts the new person record and retrieves the last inserted id
INSERT INTO person(lastname, firstname)
VALUES (lastn, firstn)
RETURNING id INTO v_id;
-- Inserts the new client and references the inserted person
INSERT INTO client(id) VALUES (v_id);
-- Return the new id so we can use it in a select clause or return the new id into the user application
RETURN v_id;
END;
$BODY$
LANGUAGE plpgsql VOLATILE;
Now we can insert the new data using:
SELECT new_client('Smith', 'John');
or
SELECT * FROM new_client('Smith', 'John');
And we get the newly created id.
new_client
integer
----------
1
you can use RETURNING clause in INSERT statement,just like the following
wgzhao=# create table foo(id int,name text);
CREATE TABLE
wgzhao=# insert into foo values(1,'wgzhao') returning id;
id
----
1
(1 row)
INSERT 0 1
wgzhao=# insert into foo values(3,'wgzhao') returning id;
id
----
3
(1 row)
INSERT 0 1
wgzhao=# create table bar(id serial,name text);
CREATE TABLE
wgzhao=# insert into bar(name) values('wgzhao') returning id;
id
----
1
(1 row)
INSERT 0 1
wgzhao=# insert into bar(name) values('wgzhao') returning id;
id
----
2
(1 row)
INSERT 0
The other answers don't show how one might use the value(s) returned by RETURNING. Here's an example where the returned value is inserted into another table.
WITH inserted_id AS (
INSERT INTO tbl1 (col1)
VALUES ('foo') RETURNING id
)
INSERT INTO tbl2 (other_id)
VALUES ((select id from inserted_id));
See the below example
CREATE TABLE users (
-- make the "id" column a primary key; this also creates
-- a UNIQUE constraint and a b+-tree index on the column
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
name TEXT,
age INT4
);
INSERT INTO users (name, age) VALUES ('Mozart', 20);
Then for getting last inserted id use this for table "user" seq column name "id"
SELECT currval(pg_get_serial_sequence('users', 'id'));
SELECT CURRVAL(pg_get_serial_sequence('my_tbl_name','id_col_name'))
You need to supply the table name and column name of course.
This will be for the current session / connection
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/functions-sequence.html
For the ones who need to get the all data record, you can add
returning *
to the end of your query to get the all object including the id.
You can use RETURNING id after insert query.
INSERT INTO distributors (id, name) VALUES (DEFAULT, 'ALI') RETURNING id;
and result:
id
----
1
In the above example id is auto-increment filed.
The better way is to use Insert with returning. Though there are already same answers, I just want to add, if you want to save this to a variable then you can do this
insert into my_table(name) returning id into _my_id;
Postgres has an inbuilt mechanism for the same, which in the same query returns the id or whatever you want the query to return.
here is an example. Consider you have a table created which has 2 columns column1 and column2 and you want column1 to be returned after every insert.
# create table users_table(id serial not null primary key, name character varying);
CREATE TABLE
#insert into users_table(name) VALUES ('Jon Snow') RETURNING id;
id
----
1
(1 row)
# insert into users_table(name) VALUES ('Arya Stark') RETURNING id;
id
----
2
(1 row)
Try this:
select nextval('my_seq_name'); // Returns next value
If this return 1 (or whatever is the start_value for your sequence), then reset the sequence back to the original value, passing the false flag:
select setval('my_seq_name', 1, false);
Otherwise,
select setval('my_seq_name', nextValue - 1, true);
This will restore the sequence value to the original state and "setval" will return with the sequence value you are looking for.
I had this issue with Java and Postgres.
I fixed it by updating a new Connector-J version.
postgresql-9.2-1002.jdbc4.jar
https://jdbc.postgresql.org/download.html:
Version 42.2.12
https://jdbc.postgresql.org/download/postgresql-42.2.12.jar
Based on #ooZman 's answer above, this seems to work for PostgreSQL v12 when you need to INSERT with the next value of a "sequence" (akin to auto_increment) without goofing anything up in your table(s) counter(s). (Note: I haven't tested it in more complex DB cluster configurations though...)
Psuedo Code
$insert_next_id = $return_result->query("select (setval('"your_id_seq"', (select nextval('"your_id_seq"')) - 1, true)) +1");