Smack! You are good.

Patrick8/24/2008 2:59:31 AM

I would suggest a minor optimization.
In many cases we know up front that more than one value is necessary.
For instance if I am going to insert 15 new rows, I know in advance that I need 15 values.
It would be nice to do it in just one stored procedure call.
Let's modify the procedure a little bit:

CREATE PROC usp_newseq_interval @amount int, @v
AS INT OUTPUT
AS UPDATE Seq
-- allocates @amount iunique values
SET @v = val = val + @amount;
go

and call it:

DECLARE @i AS INT;
EXEC usp_newseq_interval 15, @v = @i OUTPUT;
SELECT @i;

As a result of this call, 15 consecutive values have been allocated,
and @i stores the last one of them.

Alexander2/10/2006 12:54:41 PM

I'm not sure if this is the proper place to post this but I have a question. I was recently working on an SP that would do the same thing, but I used this syntax:

UPDATE [TABLE]
SET @Val = [Column] + 1,
[Column] = [Column] + 1

would this do the same thing as mentioned in the article:

DECLARE @i AS INT;
UPDATE Seq SET @i = val = val +1;
SELECT @i;

Nick12/29/2005 8:14:33 AM

Another brilliant article (ideas) from Itzik. Such a simple solution to a complex problem, or at least, a problem most of us have spent time on, I just wish i'd thought of these solutions.
I hate u Itzik -lol- :)

Peter12/13/2005 10:59:25 PM