From: | Thomas Hallgren <thomas(at)tada(dot)se> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "A(dot)M(dot)" <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Fixed length datatypes. WAS [GENERAL] UUID's as |
Date: | 2006-06-30 06:53:28 |
Message-ID: | 44A4CA68.4030508@tada.se |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jim,
>
>> I agree about splitting the utilities, except that I think the database
>> should be able to generate UUIDs somehow.
>
> There is a GUID add-in, and someone is working on a 2nd one. UUIDs
are not part of the SQL standard, and we've only seen sporadic demand
for them (and different types each time) so I can't imagine one making
it further than contrib real soon.
>
> Also, one could argue that UUIDs are a foot gun, so they're not
exactly the type of thing we want to advocate in advance of demand.
>
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> It seems to me that maybe the backend should include a 16-byte fixed
> length object (after all, we've got 1, 2, 4 and 8 bytes already) and
> then people can use that to build whatever they like, using domains,
> for example...
>
So how about the split? I.e. just add a 16 byte data type and forget all
about UUID's for now.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | mark | 2006-06-30 08:04:19 | Re: Fixed length datatypes. WAS [GENERAL] UUID's as |
Previous Message | Alain Roger | 2006-06-30 06:28:24 | phppgadmin |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | mark | 2006-06-30 08:04:19 | Re: Fixed length datatypes. WAS [GENERAL] UUID's as |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2006-06-30 06:27:10 | Re: Fixed length datatypes. WAS [GENERAL] UUID's as |