Re: Drawbacks of using BYTEA for PK?
| От | Chris Travers |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Drawbacks of using BYTEA for PK? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 015601c3d9b1$348e36c0$54285e3d@winxp обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Drawbacks of using BYTEA for PK? (David Garamond <lists@zara.6.isreserved.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Drawbacks of using BYTEA for PK?
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Satrapa" <alex@lintelsys.com.au> > As long as you don't use RFC1918 addresses, the IPv4 address(es) of the > host should be unique for the Internet. Append/prepend a 32 bit > timestamp and you have a 64bit unique identifier that is "universally" > unique (to one second). Aarrgh... So if you have 2 inserts in the same second, you have key collision? Why not append a sequence to that so you have: Unique address || timestamp || sequence value. In a case such as this I can see why you might want to use md5() to hash that value. Best Wishes, Chris Travers
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: