On 2013-10-31 08:22:14 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > "MauMau" <maumau...@gmail.com> writes:
> > Note the lack of enthusiasm for taking on maintainership of the OSSP
> > code. Pushing it into core would mean that we're buying into that
> > maintainership, hook line and sinker. I don't think that such a
> > proposal would fly.
> ISTM that the biggest problem is that we don't have a random number
> generator which generates enough bits of randomness to implement
> uuid_generate_v3. I think relatively few people would cry if we
> didn't support uuid_generate_v1(), and the others all look simple
> enough, provided there's somewhere to get lots of random bits.
Yea, I think restricting ourselves to v3/4/5 is a sensible thing.
> On Linux, it seems like we could get those bits from /dev/urandom,
> though I'm not sure how efficient that would be for the case where
> many UUIDs are being generated at once. But that wouldn't be very
> portable. It's tempting to think that we'd need a PRNG that generates
> wider values, for which we might find other application also. But I'm
> not volunteering to be the one to create such a thing.
We could copy ossp's implementation, it's just 200 lines and seems to
have a compatible license.
util-linux's libuuid is BSD as well and seems to have some windows
support although that's by memory.
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: