It was Gevik Babakhani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I was wondering if I should go ahead and add a macro datatype like the > SERIAL, only this time for the uuid.
This assumes a fact not in evidence, which is that we're going to accept a uuid-generation function as part of core. AFAIK the only reasonably non-contentious part of this proposal is the ability to *store* uuids. Generating new ones introduces a host of portability and other issues. Considering the amount of pain involved in supporting SERIAL in the parser, pg_dump, etc, I'd say that adding the above is a pretty certain route to getting your patch rejected as too invasive. If, three or four versions down the road, large numbers of people are using uuid with the same generation function, *then* it might be time to think about introducing a macro type. regards, tom lane On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 13:47 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Am Montag, 18. September 2006 13:28 schrieb Gevik Babakhani: > > > Could you do this using a domain? > > > > Tom had a very good point about this. > > And that point was? > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster