On 8/24/12 7:18 PM, Ken Dibble wrote:
>> >There are no guarantees in life. But the danger of sys(2015) lies in it's
>> >generation
>> >based on the timestamp. What are the chances of collision on this even not
>> >concatenating the machine name?
> Somewhat high, I believe. System clock ticks <> processor cycles. As I
> understand it, in VFP RAND() uses the system clock, and RAND() will
> generate the same number over and over and over in a tight loop on a fast
> machine, until the system clock ticks over.
Well, here's the test code I used:
{{{
create cursor temp (gid c(16))
for n = 1 to 1000000
insert into temp (gid) values (sys(2015))
endfor
select gid, count(*) from temp group by 1 having count(*) > 1
}}}
Let me know how many non-unique rows you get on your processor. I'm running XP
on a
virtual machine so that could be throttling my system enough to not see any
issue.
With auto-incrementing integer keys, how would you handle offline inserts
without
things getting incredibly complex?
Paul
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
