| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jimn(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, Gevik Babakhani <pgdev(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Patch for UUID datatype (beta) |
| Date: | 2006-09-19 13:20:13 |
| Message-ID: | 20060919132013.GT47167@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:45:07PM -0400, mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc wrote:
> I would not use a 100% random number generator for a UUID value as was
> suggested. I prefer inserting the MAC address and the time, to at
> least allow me to control if a collision is possible. This is not easy
> to do using a few lines of C code. I'd rather have a UUID type in core
> with no generation routine, than no UUID type in core because the code
> is too complicated to maintain, or not portable enough.
As others have mentioned, using MAC address doesn't remove the
possibility of a collision.
Maybe a good compromise that would allow a generator function to go into
the backend would be to combine the current time with a random number.
That will ensure that you won't get a dupe, so long as your clock never
runs backwards.
--
Jim Nasby jimn(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomi NA | 2006-09-19 13:30:15 | Re: vista |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2006-09-19 13:19:39 | Re: vista |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2006-09-19 13:30:26 | Re: Dynamic linking on AIX |
| Previous Message | Gevik Babakhani | 2006-09-19 12:28:27 | new patch for uuid datatype |