Hi Uvindra,

One aspect to keep in mind is that if you have a lot of foreign key
references referring this table, all those tables will have a UUID if you
choose UUID as the primary key. This might affect the storage space and
indexing of those tables as well.

Thanks,
Akalanaka.

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Just thought of pointing out that there is an option of optimizing UUIDs
> stored in the DB to make them easier to sequence and reduce storage
> size[1]. Though I doubt we will have such high volumes of data in a given
> DB instance with the new C5 architecture so don't think we need to go down
> this route.
>
> +1 for a perf test as Bhathiya suggested to make sure.
>
> [1] https://www.percona.com/blog/2014/12/19/store-uuid-optimized-way/
>
> On 19 November 2016 at 16:58, Lahiru Cooray <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Bathiya/Jo,
>> Thanks for the valuable information.
>> +1 for UUID as the PK
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Joseph Fonseka <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Joseph Fonseka <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi All
>>>>
>>>> Another most obvious advantage of using UUIDs would that it will
>>>> simplify import/export of APIs. I am +1 for using UUIDs as primary keys.
>>>>
>>>
>>> In a more correct term UUIDs will simplify managing APIs cross
>>> environments.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Jo
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Bhathiya Jayasekara <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Lahiru,
>>>>>
>>>>> One of the reasons to expose UUIDs instead of auto increment IDs in
>>>>> REST resources is that if we expose auto increment ID, we unwillingly
>>>>> expose certain internal information like how many resources we have in our
>>>>> system and the pattern how we store these resources. That information can
>>>>> be used as vulnerabilities for security attacks. Due to the same reason,
>>>>> it's kind of a standard to use UUIDs instead of auto increment IDs in REST
>>>>> world. You can find some detailed explanations about that on the 
>>>>> web[1][2].
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12378220/api-design-a
>>>>> nd-security-why-hide-internal-ids
>>>>> [2] http://blogs.perl.org/users/ovid/2014/11/stop-putting-auto-i
>>>>> ncrement-ids-in-urls.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Bhathiya
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Lahiru Cooray <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Uvindra,
>>>>>> The reason you mentioned is:
>>>>>> "Having a UUID for this purpose means that end users cannot guess
>>>>>> the possible unique identity of other entities, which is possible if we
>>>>>> exposed an integer based identifier."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is the purpose of having a non guessable Id here? Anywhere the
>>>>>> user who has permissions to invoke api's can get the uuid list or simply
>>>>>> can view in the Store/Publisher UI. If there are any more implementation
>>>>>> constraints (eg: user should be able to delete api's only in his tenant
>>>>>> domain, etc) should be handle internally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What I'm trying to highlight is, we should only move to a hybrid
>>>>>> approach only if there's a valid use case. Else it's less complex if we 
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> move only with the auto increment Id.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [Solution we discuss here can also be reused in AppM c5 upgrade]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:27 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We expose the unique UUID of a given artifact to the end user via
>>>>>>> REST APIs. You can see how this is used in the REST API docs[1]. We cant
>>>>>>> use the auto increment ID for this purpose for the reasons I mentioned
>>>>>>> earlier.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] https://docs.wso2.com/display/AM200/apidocs/publisher/index.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18 November 2016 at 22:48, Lahiru Cooray <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was under the impression that the UUID was used as a result of
>>>>>>>> having registry and UUID was used to map the registry resource. Pls 
>>>>>>>> correct
>>>>>>>> me if I'm wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When the registry is no longer present, I don't see a real use case
>>>>>>>> of going for a hybrid approach. Either we could use UUID as a PK or an 
>>>>>>>> auto
>>>>>>>> increment ID.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In this case +1 for an auto increment ID as the PK.
>>>>>>>> Reasons: easy to debug manually/ easy to sort by id/ save space
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:34 PM, Uvindra Dias Jayasinha <
>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We already have a UUID column for few tables such as AM_API and
>>>>>>>>> AM_APPLICATION which is used to uniquely identify a record. The 
>>>>>>>>> reason why
>>>>>>>>> we have a UUID column is because it is the unique identifier that we 
>>>>>>>>> expose
>>>>>>>>> to the end user. Having a UUID for this purpose means that end users 
>>>>>>>>> cannot
>>>>>>>>> guess the possible unique identity of other entities, which is 
>>>>>>>>> possible if
>>>>>>>>> we exposed an integer based identifier.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> However at table level we were still maintaining an auto
>>>>>>>>> incrementing primary key. So the UUID was used externally but the 
>>>>>>>>> integer
>>>>>>>>> key was used privately to maintain foreign key relationships within 
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> schema.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We first thought it might be a good idea to dispense of the auto
>>>>>>>>> incrementing primary key and use the UUID as the primary key itself 
>>>>>>>>> since
>>>>>>>>> it seemed like we had two columns that served somewhat duplicate 
>>>>>>>>> purposes.
>>>>>>>>> But I have been doing some research regarding this and have found 
>>>>>>>>> that the
>>>>>>>>> industry is divided a bit regarding this point.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> These links advocate UUIDs as primary keys
>>>>>>>>> https://blog.codinghorror.com/primary-keys-ids-versus-guids/
>>>>>>>>> https://www.clever-cloud.com/blog/engineering/2015/05/20/why
>>>>>>>>> -auto-increment-is-a-terrible-idea/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> These links recommend auto incrementing integers as primary keys
>>>>>>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/404040/how-do-you-like-yo
>>>>>>>>> ur-primary-keys/404057#404057
>>>>>>>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/829284/guid-vs-int-identity
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We can still continue with our hybrid approach of having both an
>>>>>>>>> auto incriminating integer as primary key and using the UUID for 
>>>>>>>>> external
>>>>>>>>> interactions, whihc seems to be also used by some to get the best of 
>>>>>>>>> both
>>>>>>>>> worlds.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So how should we proceed?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Uvindra
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mobile: 777733962
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> *Lahiru Cooray*
>>>>>>>> Software Engineer
>>>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.;http://wso2.com/
>>>>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mobile: +94 715 654154
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Uvindra
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mobile: 777733962
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> *Lahiru Cooray*
>>>>>> Software Engineer
>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.;http://wso2.com/
>>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mobile: +94 715 654154
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> *Bhathiya Jayasekara*
>>>>> *Senior Software Engineer,*
>>>>> *WSO2 inc., http://wso2.com <http://wso2.com>*
>>>>>
>>>>> *Phone: +94715478185 <%2B94715478185>*
>>>>> *LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/bhathiyaj
>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/bhathiyaj>*
>>>>> *Twitter: https://twitter.com/bhathiyax
>>>>> <https://twitter.com/bhathiyax>*
>>>>> *Blog: http://movingaheadblog.blogspot.com
>>>>> <http://movingaheadblog.blogspot.com/>*
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Architecture mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *Joseph Fonseka*
>>>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>
>>>> mobile: +94 772 512 430
>>>> skype: jpfonseka
>>>>
>>>> * <http://lk.linkedin.com/in/rumeshbandara>*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Joseph Fonseka*
>>> WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>
>>> mobile: +94 772 512 430
>>> skype: jpfonseka
>>>
>>> * <http://lk.linkedin.com/in/rumeshbandara>*
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Architecture mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Lahiru Cooray*
>> Software Engineer
>> WSO2, Inc.;http://wso2.com/
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>
>> Mobile: +94 715 654154
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Architecture mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Uvindra
>
> Mobile: 777733962
>
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
*Darshana Akalanka Pagoda Arachchi,*
*Senior Software Engineer, WSO2*
*+94777118016*
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to