| From: | Alex Pilosov <alex(at)pilosoft(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Dmitry G(dot) Mastrukov" <dmitry(at)taurussoft(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Re: New data type: uniqueidentifier |
| Date: | 2001-07-02 21:27:37 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.10.10107021725330.14976-100000@spider.pilosoft.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2 Jul 2001, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Alex Pilosov writes:
>
> > I don't think you know what UUID is. It is NOT just a unique randon
> > number. There are specific rules for construction of such number, specific
> > rules for comparison of numbers (no, its not bit-by-bit), thus a datatype
> > is most appropriate answer.
>
> A data type may be appropriate for storing these values, but not for
> generating them. Functions generate stuff, data types store stuff.
Sorry, apparently we misunderstood each other but are really in full
agreement.
Dmitry's stuff contains both datatype (uniqueidentifier), a function to
generate a new object of that type (newid), and a set of functions to
implement comparison operators for that type.
I don't see anything wrong with that setup, but maybe I'm still missing
something?
-alex
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Moore | 2001-07-02 22:23:43 | Re: Production Backup and Recovery |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-07-02 19:20:57 | Re: Re: New data type: uniqueidentifier |