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. Thanks! On Mar 26, 1:57 pm, Naveen <knig...@gmail.com> 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 <taylorsinglet...@twitter.com> > 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, Twitterhttp://twitter.com/episod