[Vtigercrm-developers] sequence tables vs auto_increment

[Nicolas Larcipretti]

Hi rodrigo,

Indeed, that would be changing 6 for half a dozen like we say in Brazil
(lol).

Cheers

2012/4/26 Rodrigo Souza <rodrigo at hostplan.com.br>

> Dears
>
> the oracle is to create a trigger to feed an autonumber field, then the
> problem would notextinguish these tables _seq
>
>
>
>
> Atte,
> *Rodrigo Souza de Oliveira*
> *Consultor de TI
> *Hostplan Informática Ltda
> Telefones: (21) 9217-7909 e/ou (21) 8153-5287
> website: www.hostplan.com.br
> e-mail/msn: rodrigo at hostplan.com.br
>
>
>
>
> Em 26 de abril de 2012 16:54, Nicolas Larcipretti <
> niclarcipretti at gmail.com> escreveu:
>
>> Maybe portability. If you try to port all the tables to Oracle, for
>> instance, auto-increment would never work. But if you control the sequences
>> in a separate table, it becomes highly portable.
>>
>> Don't know if the people who first developed Vtiger were thinking this
>> way...but it's definitely a good way to think!
>>
>>
>> 2012/4/26 Adam Heinz <amh at metricwise.net>
>>
>>> What is the use of tables like vtiger_picklist_seq when the
>>> vtiger_picklist.picklistid primary key is already defined as
>>> auto_increment?  If you need the picklistid, just call ADOdb
>>> Insert_ID() after the fact.  I know they're trivial little things, but
>>> there's more than one hundred _seq tables cluttering up SHOW TABLES.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> http://www.vtiger.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> http://www.vtiger.com/
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.vtiger.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.vtigercrm.com/pipermail/vtigercrm-developers/attachments/20120426/485c749b/attachment-0001.html