2008/10/10 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Mark Mielke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Anyways - I only somewhat disagree. I remember the original discussions, >> and I remember agreeing with the points to keep PostgreSQL UUID support >> thin and rigid. It's valuable for it to be built-in to the database. >> It's not necessarily valuable for PostgreSQL to support every UUID >> version or every format. Supporting additional formats is the direction >> of supporting every UUID format. Three months from now, somebody is >> going to propose allowing '-' or ':'. What should the answer be then? > > Well, this discussion started with the conventional wisdom about "be > conservative in what you send and liberal in what you accept". I'd > still resist emitting any UUID format other than the RFC-approved one, > but I don't see anything very wrong in being able to read common > variants.
Is it problem do for non standard UUID formats pgfoundry project? Regards Pavel Stehule > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
