Jim C. Nasby wrote:
A better solution is to use a combination of a timestamp and a sequence.
Why both? Because it's possible for the clock to be set back (though
this is something best avoided), and a sequence will eventually roll
over.
With the default MAXVALUE of a postgresql sequence (9 quintillion or so)
you'd need a pretty amazingly fast cluster to roll one over, wouldn't you?
Of course if you choose to truncate them to something smaller they might,
but I'd see little benefit of both truncating and adding a timestamp.
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
