I doubt one URI design vs another where it will make any observable
difference.
Andy
On 01/07/2019 18:50, Siddhesh Rane wrote:
You could save the UUID as a 128 bit number in the database.
Conversion between alphanumeric and byte encoded UUIDs can be done on
the fly.
This would be the most compact solution compared to text format.
Regards
Siddhesh Rane
On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 9:02 PM Mikael Pesonen
<mikael.peso...@lingsoft.fi> wrote:
We are now using UUIDs for resource ids, e.g.
https://example.com/f0c6b590-0bd6-4c66-8872-f6a0f3aa33ac where id length
is 38 characters.
Would it be any better performance wise to use more compact id
https://example.com/jgie3590roGvnfsjvGUEu using 21 alphanum characters
UUID is a standard atleast and better supported in various systems.
--
Lingsoft - 30 years of Leading Language Management
www.lingsoft.fi
Speech Applications - Language Management - Translation - Reader's and Writer's
Tools - Text Tools - E-books and M-books
Mikael Pesonen
System Engineer
e-mail: mikael.peso...@lingsoft.fi
Tel. +358 2 279 3300
Time zone: GMT+2
Helsinki Office
Eteläranta 10
FI-00130 Helsinki
FINLAND
Turku Office
Kauppiaskatu 5 A
FI-20100 Turku
FINLAND
