[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 11:21:51PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 08:20:13AM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:45:07PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would not use a 100% random number generator
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have the impression I'm not being heard.
*I* control the MAC address assignment for all of *MY* units.
No, you're missing the point. How does that help *me* avoid collisions with
your UUIDs? UUIDs are supposed to be unique period, not just unique on your
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Gregory Stark wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have the impression I'm not being heard.
*I* control the MAC address assignment for all of *MY* units.
No, you're missing the point. How does that help *me* avoid collisions with
your UUIDs? UUIDs are supposed to be
Hi, Mark,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The versions that include a MAC address, time, and serial number for
the machine come pretty close, presuming that the user has not
overwritten the MAC address with something else. It's unique at
manufacturing time.
Not even that is guaranteed. I remember
Mark,A model that intended to try and guarantee uniqueness would provide aUUID generation service for the entire host, that was not specific to
any application, or database, possibly accessible via the loopbackaddress. It would ensure that at any given time, either the time isnew, or the sequence
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 05:04:00AM -0400, Gregory Stark wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have the impression I'm not being heard.
*I* control the MAC address assignment for all of *MY* units.
No, you're missing the point. How does that help *me* avoid collisions with
your UUIDs? UUIDs are
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Really this whole debate only reinforces the point that there isn't
a single way of doing UUID generation. There are multiple libraries
out there each with pros and cons. It makes more sense to have
multiple pgfoundry UUID generating modules.
Exactly. If I lead you to
Jeremy Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I must jump in with my amusement at this whole conversation. I just
looked up the standard (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4122.txt) and it
includes this abstract:
A UUID is 128 bits long, and can guarantee
uniqueness across space and time.
The only
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:45:07PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would not use a 100% random number generator for a UUID value as was
suggested. I prefer inserting the MAC address and the time, to at
least allow me to control if a collision is possible. This is not easy
to do using a few
As others have mentioned, using MAC address doesn't remove the
possibility of a collision.
Maybe a good compromise that would allow a generator function to go into
the backend would be to combine the current time with a random number.
That will ensure that you won't get a dupe, so long as
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 03:35:55PM +0200, Gevik Babakhani wrote:
As others have mentioned, using MAC address doesn't remove the
possibility of a collision.
Maybe a good compromise that would allow a generator function to go into
the backend would be to combine the current time with a
[-patches trimmed from list]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As others have mentioned, using MAC address doesn't remove the
possibility of a collision.
It does, as I control the MAC address. I can choose not to overwrite it.
I can choose to ensure that any cases where it is overwritten, it is
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 10:11:39AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As others have mentioned, using MAC address doesn't remove the
possibility of a collision.
It does, as I control the MAC address. I can choose not to overwrite it.
I can choose to ensure that any cases
On 2006-09-19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Different UUID forms can be unique within their domain. As long as I
control the MAC address assignment for all of my units, my MAC address
can be guaranteed to be unique across space and time,
You do not know (and can never know) that
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 10:02:40PM -, Andrew - Supernews wrote:
On 2006-09-19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Different UUID forms can be unique within their domain. As long as I
control the MAC address assignment for all of my units, my MAC address
can be guaranteed to be
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 08:20:13AM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:45:07PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would not use a 100% random number generator for a UUID value as was
suggested. I prefer inserting the MAC address and the time, to at
least allow me to control
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 09:51:23AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 08:20:13AM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:45:07PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would not use a 100% random number generator for a UUID value as was
suggested. I prefer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 08:20:13AM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:45:07PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would not use a 100% random number generator for a UUID value as was
suggested. I prefer inserting the MAC address and the time, to
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 11:21:51PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 08:20:13AM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:45:07PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would not use a 100% random number generator for a UUID value as was
On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 11:11 +0200, Harald Armin Massa wrote:
Gevik,
uniqueness is never a guaranteed. that is according to the RFC docs.
uniqueness is never a guaranteed in the sense that there is a tiny
chance someone of the other side of the planet might generate the
same
guid.
As
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't guaranteed uniqueness the very attribute that's expected? AFAIK
there's a commonly accepted algorithm providing this.
Anyone who thinks UUIDs are guaranteed unique has been drinking too much
of the kool-aid. They're at best probably unique. Some
Am Montag, 18. September 2006 09:21 schrieb Andreas Pflug:
Isn't guaranteed uniqueness the very attribute that's expected? AFAIK
there's a commonly accepted algorithm providing this.
There are several such algorithms, which is part of the problem. If someone
could sort that out, we might get
Completely agreed. I can remove the function from the patch. The
temptation was just too high not to include the new_guid() in the
patch :)
On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 10:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't guaranteed uniqueness the very attribute that's
Anyone who thinks UUIDs are guaranteed unique has been drinking too much of the kool-aid.
Identifier uniqueness considerations: This document specifies three algorithms to generate UUIDs: the first leverages the unique values of 802 MAC addresses to
guarantee uniqueness, the
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 05:29:34PM +0200, Harald Armin Massa wrote:
I would really like PostgreSQL to include an uuid-generation function
crafted along the recommendations in rfc4122 or ISO/IEC 9834-8; so those
UUIDs have a ISO/IEC-defined uniqueness or at least a ISO/IEC-defined
extreme
Harald Armin Massa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
They also talk about a guaranteed differentness - and as much as I
understand, they are Unique as long as the MAC-Adresses of the Network-Cards
are unique, and fall back to extremly likely when there is no network card
present.
MAC addresses are
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 10:33:22AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Andreas Pflug [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't guaranteed uniqueness the very attribute that's expected? AFAIK
there's a commonly accepted algorithm providing this.
Anyone who thinks UUIDs are guaranteed unique has been drinking too
If you're going to yank it, please at least include a generator in
contrib.
Personally, I'd like to see at least some kind of generator in core,
with appropriate info/disclaimers in the docs. A simple random-number
generator is probably the best way to go in that regard. I think that
most people
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 04:00:22PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
BTW, at a former company we used SHA1s to identify files that had been
uploaded. We were wondering on the odds of 2 different files hashing to
the same value and found some statistical comparisons of probabilities.
I don't recall
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 12:23:16PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have UUID generation in core in my current implementation. In the
last year that I've been using it, I have already chosen twice to
generate UUIDs from my calling program. I find it faster, as it avoids
have to call out to
On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 16:00 -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
BTW, at a former company we used SHA1s to identify files that had been
uploaded. We were wondering on the odds of 2 different files hashing to
the same value and found some statistical comparisons of probabilities.
I don't recall the
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 04:17:50PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 12:23:16PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have UUID generation in core in my current implementation. In the
last year that I've been using it, I have already chosen twice to
generate UUIDs from my
32 matches
Mail list logo
