RE: [SQLObject] request for elaboration on code

[Luke O. <lu...@me...>]

>> There are alternatives to doing it by oid, such as pre-selecting the
> nextval
>> on the sequence, but using oids seemed to be the least intrusive to
>> SQLObject's design.
>
> I think it would be reasonable to either derive the standard sequence name
> as you described or accept it in the class definition like _seqName or
> similar. Nextval could then operate in the (somewhat)same way( that we are
> currently using oid. Is there organizational resistance to doing it that
> way?
>
> In other words, if I do it myself, will it be accepted into the project?

I don't see any organizational resistance to it. The only reason an alternate
PostgresConnection (PostgresSeqConnection?) would be problematic is if it
altered the signature of _queryInsertID. That's why a style-derived system
will be easiest. (This means that the special case ones where _seqName would
be necessary still won't be feasible.)

Just so we're on the same page, _queryInsertID in this version will:

if not id: select nextval
 |
create insert SQL
 |
execute insert


- Luke