On Mar 30, 2006, at 2:27 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
On 2006-03-30T10:46:41, Andrew Beekhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, after a reboot, just run through them - the first time you
assign
one, that might be a while (is_used(id)) {id++} which might run
as far
as 20 iterations or so ;-) And then you're set again.
its doable but not terribly "nice".
Do you find the UUIDs terribly nice instead? ;-)
visually no, but then i don't create things without an id.
in terms of complexity, yes. i find out i need one, i ask, i get. i
dont need to search for the last one that was created at any point.
so i'm thinking... you got caught out forgetting to set an id.... i'm
betting you learned from it and it hasn't happened again. right?
so perhaps we're trying to solve a problem we don't have?
in normal circumstances the only place UUID-like entries occur is in
the status section where the node's UUID is included in a
concatenation with other values to form an id (in which case the UUID
is used multiple times and should be compressible).
That's the whole point;
I'd like to replace them with a small number if possible (for the
auto-generated stuff).
But the GUI also assigns ids - not sure how several GUI clients
prevent clashes...
IIRC usually it uses the resource id , the object type and a counter
in there
Right, which has just about the same likelihood of colliding as some
other non-random number.
not really since the resource id is always unique.
--
Andrew Beekhof
“The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he
didn’t exist.” - The Usual Suspects
_______________________________________________________
Linux-HA-Dev: [email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha-dev
Home Page: http://linux-ha.org/
