Geoff Worboys wrote:

> I am not voting for FB to implement such capabilities into the engine,
> I think it is highly appropriate that the developer should be forced
> to be aware of and think about this issue in the particular
> circumstance and come up with an appropriate solution (even it the
> solution is to talk the client out of the requirement).

I'm not voting on this too. Paul's idea it's to get a 'incremented number',
not a 'sequential number'. This number will not be use for anything else
that 'row identification'.

I still think the problem was calling 'AUTOINC' to this newfield in the
beggining, and everyone related this with 'AUTOINCREMENT' = 'Get a
Sequential Number'.

So: we don't care about sequential numbers on this new field. We just care
that will be an 'automatic generator-based number if the value is null'.

I think that it will be a good idea if we stop talking about sequential
numbers at this time. :)

Artur Anjos