Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jim,
>> I agree about splitting the utilities, except that I think the database
>> should be able to generate UUIDs somehow.
> There is a GUID add-in, and someone is working on a 2nd one. UUIDs are not part of the SQL standard, and we've only seen sporadic demand for them (and different types each time) so I can't imagine one making it further than contrib real soon.
> Also, one could argue that UUIDs are a foot gun, so they're not exactly the type of thing we want to advocate in advance of demand.

Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> It seems to me that maybe the backend should include a 16-byte fixed
> length object (after all, we've got 1, 2, 4 and 8 bytes already) and
> then people can use that to build whatever they like, using domains,
> for example...
So how about the split? I.e. just add a 16 byte data type and forget all about UUID's for now.

Thomas Hallgren

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to