Re: UUID - Data type inefficient

From: Kless <jonas(dot)esp(at)googlemail(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: UUID - Data type inefficient
Date: 2008-07-10 17:11:28
Message-ID: 0e730abc-8f8c-4e9e-81a1-19734761c67f@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Jul 10, 5:05 pm, m(dot)(dot)(dot)(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc (Mark Mielke) wrote:
> Mark Mielke wrote:
> > I didn't notice that he put 16. Now I'm looking at uuid.c in
> > PostgreSQL 8.3.3 and I see that it does use 16, and the struct
> > pg_uuid_t is length 16. I find myself confused now - why does
> > PostgreSQL define UUID_LEN as 16?
>
> > I will investigate if I have time tonight. There MUST be some mistake
> > or misunderstanding. 128-bit numbers should be stored as 8 bytes, not 16.
>
> Grrrr.... Kless you've confused me.  32-bit numbers = 4 bytes, 64-bit
> numbers = 8 bytes, 128-bit numbers = 16 bytes.
>
> You are out to lunch and you dragged me with you. Did we have beer at
> least? :-)
>
> Cheers,
> mark
>
> --
xDxD I see that the PostgreSQL developers have sense of humor :) I
like it.

It has been a failure mine. I question about that in the IRC, anybody
says me that structure but also say me of see here:

pgsql/src/backend/utils/adt/uuid.c:45:uuid_out

thing that I didn't make.

But it's clear that this problem has been well resolved.

Greetings!

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabrízio de Royes Mello 2008-07-10 17:20:27 digest
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2008-07-10 17:09:53 Re: Protocol 3, Execute, maxrows to return, impact?