Second that. Our app continuously retrieves feeds of individual users
and lists. Monotonically increasing are required to be able to do that
(using since_id).

Please provide an alternative for this use case in case you change
your id generation scheme.


On Mar 26, 1:57 pm, Naveen <> wrote:
> We do not require that ids be sequential, but if the ids are not
> monotonically increasing it cause some issue with how we manage
> since_ids..
> i.e. if a message posted by userA, 1 ns after userB, we would assume
> userB has a higher id than userA. While it may seem like nitpicking,
> wouldn't there a change userB message wont get delivered if its id is
> lower than userAs message and I happen to  query the API just before
> userB but right after userA posted?
> --Naveen
> On Mar 26, 4:41 pm, Taylor Singletary <>
> wrote:
> > Hi Developers,
> > It's no secret that Twitter is growing exponentially. The tweets keep coming
> > with ever increasing velocity, thanks in large part to your great
> > applications.
> > Twitter has adapted to the increasing number of tweets in ways that have
> > affected you in the past: We moved from 32 bit unsigned integers to 64-bit
> > unsigned integers for status IDs some time ago. You all weathered that storm
> > with ease. The tweetapoclypse was averted, and the tweets kept flowing.
> > Now we're reaching the scalability limit of our current tweet ID generation
> > scheme. Unlike the previous tweet ID migrations, the solution to the current
> > issue is significantly different. However, in most cases the new approach we
> > will take will not result in any noticeable differences to you the developer
> > or your users.
> > We are planning to replace our current sequential tweet ID generation
> > routine with a simple, more scalable solution. IDs will still be 64-bit
> > unsigned integers. However, this new solution is no longer guaranteed to
> > generate sequential IDs.  Instead IDs will be derived based on time: the
> > most significant bits being sourced from a timestamp and the least
> > significant bits will be effectively random.
> > Please don't depend on the exact format of the ID. As our infrastructure
> > needs evolve, we might need to tweak the generation algorithm again.
> > If you've been trying to divine meaning from status IDs aside from their
> > role as a primary key, you won't be able to anymore. Likewise for usage of
> > IDs in mathematical operations -- for instance, subtracting two status IDs
> > to determine the number of tweets in between will no longer be possible.
> > For the majority of applications we think this scheme switch will be a
> > non-event. Before implementing these changes, we'd like to know if your
> > applications currently depend on the sequential nature of IDs. Do you depend
> > on the density of the tweet sequence being constant?  Are you trying to
> > analyze the IDs as anything other than opaque, ordered identifiers? Aside
> > for guaranteed sequential tweet ID ordering, what APIs can we provide you to
> > accomplish your goals?
> > Taylor Singletary
> > Developer Advocate, Twitter

Reply via email to