I did performance tests back then, it actually makes a significant
difference on most databases, especially for batch imports. Even more if
the database is not running on localhost. Not sure about the actual numbers
though. You can always switch to the database sequence generator for IDs if
you want to try it out yourself, I think it's still available and it's a
simple configuration option.
Blake Regalia <blake.rega...@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 14. Feb. 2018,
> I can see how this makes sense for future compatibility with distributed
> systems across a variety of RDBMS, although I'm not convinced it's more
> efficient for single nodes (e.g., auto-incrementing fields do not require
> round trips). Thanks for the reply! Just wanted to know while porting a
> bulk importer for 584.
> - Blake
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:15 PM, Sebastian Schaffert <
> sebastian.schaff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Blake,
>> Auto-increment requires querying the database for the next sequence
>> number (or the last given ID, depending on the database you use), and
>> that's adding another database roundtrip. Snowflake is purely in code, very
>> fast to compute, and safe even in distributed setups.
>> Is it causing problems?
>> Blake Regalia <blake.rega...@gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 13. Feb. 2018,
>>> What was the justification for using the 'snowflake' bigint type for the
>>> id fields on nodes, triples and namespaces?
>>> - Blake