RE: Re: New data type: uniqueidentifier

Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>

From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>

To: "Thomas Swan" <tswan@olemiss.edu>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e@gmx.net>

Cc: "Dmitry G. Mastrukov" <dmitry@taurussoft.org>, <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>

Date: 2001-07-03T01:37:33Z

Lists: pgsql-hackers

> don't create a bazillion datatypes.  Besides, 128 bit numbers are 7
> byte integers.

Hang on:  128 div 8 = 16 byte integer

> PostgreSQL has an int8 (8 byte integer) datatype.

And therefore it is a _64_ bit integer and you can't have a 256bit unique
number in it...

> While I like the UUID function idea, I'd recommend a better solution to
> creating an "unique" identifier.  Why not create a serial8 datatype:
> int8 with an int8 sequence = 256bit "unique" number.  {Yes, I know
> violating my first sentence.}  Then, you'd have the same thing (or
> better) AND your not relying on randomness.

Chris