Thom Brown <thombrown@gmail.com> writes:
> I can see why you wouldn't expect it to end up sharing the same
> sequence. If you were to manually create a sequence and wanted to use
> it on a column, you probably wouldn't bother using the SERIAL
> datatype, but use integer instead. So really since we know the first
> table has a datatype of SERIAL on one of its columns, we might instead
> wish to have it create a new implicit sequence instead of merely
> converting it to an INTEGER datatype and adding a default constraint
> to the same sequence as the original table.
Thinking of SERIAL as a type is your first mistake ;-). It is not a
type. It is a shorthand for making a sequence and sticking a suitable
default on a plain integer column. So what LIKE sees is an integer
column with a default, and it copies that.
regards, tom lane