On 2021-04-07 10:35:55 -0600, Rob Sargent wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2021, at 10:17 AM, Ron 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
>
On 4/7/21 1:16 PM, Rob Sargent wrote:
On 4/7/21 11:59 AM, Ron wrote:
On 4/7/21 11:35 AM, Rob Sargent wrote:
On Apr 7, 2021, at 10:17 AM, Ron 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.
On 4/7/21 11:59 AM, Ron wrote:
On 4/7/21 11:35 AM, Rob Sargent wrote:
On Apr 7, 2021, at 10:17 AM, Ron 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 ge
On 4/7/21 11:35 AM, Rob Sargent wrote:
On Apr 7, 2021, at 10:17 AM, Ron 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
> On Apr 7, 2021, at 10:17 AM, Ron 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 clu
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 d
On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 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 con
>
> 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 abo
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 3:40 AM Laurenz Albe wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 21:28 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > I would never use UUIDS for keys though.
>
> That makes me curious for your reasons.
>
> I see the following disadvantages:
>
> - A UUID requires twice as much storage space as a big
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 10:26 PM Rob Sargent wrote:
>
> On 4/1/21 8:28 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> >
> > This is one of the great debates in computer science and it is not
> > settled. There are various tradeoffs around using a composite key
> > derived from the data (aka natural key) vs generated
On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 21:28 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I would never use UUIDS for keys though.
That makes me curious for your reasons.
I see the following disadvantages:
- A UUID requires twice as much storage space as a bigint.
- B-tree indexes are space optimized for inserting at the
r
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 8:57 AM Hemil Ruparel
wrote:
> I used uuid4 for customer ids because i needed to interface with payment
> providers. Is that wrong? All other places except transaction ids, i have
> used serial ints
>
> On Fri 2 Apr, 2021, 8:56 AM Rob Sargent, wrote:
>
>> On 4/1/21 8:28 PM
I used uuid4 for customer ids because i needed to interface with payment
providers. Is that wrong? All other places except transaction ids, i have
used serial ints
On Fri 2 Apr, 2021, 8:56 AM Rob Sargent, wrote:
> On 4/1/21 8:28 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> >
> > This is one of the great debates
On 4/1/21 8:28 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
This is one of the great debates in computer science and it is not
settled. There are various tradeoffs around using a composite key
derived from the data (aka natural key) vs generated identifiers. It's
a complex topic with many facets: performance, org
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 3:36 AM Mohan Radhakrishnan
wrote:
>
> Hello,
> We have UUIDs in our tables which are primary keys. But in some
> cases
> we also identify a composite unique key apart from the primary key.
>
> My assumption is that there should be a unique key index created b
Etiquette on these lists is to reply in line or below the relevant portion,
not top-post with full quoting like default gmail behavior.
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:18 AM Mohan Radhakrishnan <
radhakrishnan.mo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But we don't search using UUIDs always. Only when data from another
I will cover the UUIDs first. They are indispensable to us.
1. The data is distributed over regions So we need the row to be unique.
2. This distributed data is sent to services as events. That is the
application architecture.
But we don't search using UUIDs always. Only when data from another
dis
Mohan Radhakrishnan writes:
> We have UUIDs in our tables which are primary keys. But in
> some cases
> we also identify a composite unique key apart from the primary key.
> My assumption is that there should be a unique key index created by us
> using the composite key. And when we
18 matches
Mail list logo
