On Mar 30, 2006, at 10:12 AM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
On 2006-03-29T18:24:58, Andrew Beekhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've been wondering whether anyone would feel strongly about instead
assigning them (if the admin didn't fill it in himself) in a id="id-
%d"
format, were %d is a continuously increasing number.
epoch seconds perhaps?
Doesn't really work well if you have to assign more than one id per
second, does it? ;-) Also, epoch seconds is just as annoying to type.
I'd have suggested starting with id-1 and then going up from there -
always simply choosing the next free number.
and figuring out what that last number was after a reboot?
collisions from updates on other nodes?
Doesn't have to be all that
fast, afterall. If you keep track of the last number you assigned and
simply try the next one, all would be well.
Sincerely,
Lars Marowsky-Brée
--
High Availability & Clustering
SUSE Labs, Research and Development
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business -- Charles Darwin
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
--
Andrew Beekhof
"Ooo Ahhh, Glenn McRath" - TISM
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
