Re: Primary keys and composite unique keys(basic question)

From: Rob Sargent <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Primary keys and composite unique keys(basic question)
Date: 2021-04-07 16:35:55
Message-ID: 9FFB0361-5256-4175-9C51-5D9F6E6969D9@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> On Apr 7, 2021, at 10:17 AM, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>  On 4/5/21 9:37 PM, Rob Sargent wrote:
>>> It's a small thing, but UUIDs are absolutely not memorizable by
>>> humans; they have zero semantic value. Sequential numeric identifiers
>>> are generally easier to transpose and the value gives some clues to
>>> its age (of course, in security contexts this can be a downside).
>>>
>> I take the above as a definite plus. Spent too much of my life correcting others’ use of “remembered” id’s that just happened to perfectly match the wrong thing.
>
> People seem to have stopped appending check digits to identifiers about 20 years ago, and I'm not sure why.
>
No the problem is “start from one”. User has item/I’d 10875 in hand and types in 10785 which of course in a sequence supplied ID steam is perfectly valid and wrong. Really hard to track down.
> --
> Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ron 2021-04-07 17:59:22 Re: Primary keys and composite unique keys(basic question)
Previous Message Ron 2021-04-07 16:16:48 Re: Primary keys and composite unique keys(basic question)