Re: [PATCH] Implement uuid_version()
Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
From: Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Jose Luis Tallon <jltallon@adv-solutions.net>,
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Date: 2019-07-13T15:13:36Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hello Peter, >> About doc: I'd consider "generation" instead of "generating" as a >> secondary index term. > > We do use the "-ing" form for other secondary index terms. It's useful > because the concatenation of primary and secondary term should usually > make a phrase of some sort. The alternative would be "generation of", > but that doesn't seem clearly better. Ok, fine. I looked but did not find other instances of "generating". >> What about avoiding a redirection with something like: >> >> Datum (* const pg_random_uuid)(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS) = gen_random_uuid; > > That seems very confusing. Dunno. Possibly. The user does not have to look at the implementation, and probably such code would deserve a comment. The point is to avoid one call so as to perform the same (otherwise the pg_random_uuid would be slightly slower), and to ensure that it behaves the same, as it would be the very same function by construction. I've switched the patch to ready anyway. -- Fabien.
Commits
-
Add gen_random_uuid function
- 5925e5549890 13.0 landed
-
Add a 64-bit hash function for type hstore.
- eb6f29141bed 12.0 cited