| From: | Richard Broersma Jr <rabroersma(at)yahoo(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | carter ck <carterck32(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: IS it a good practice to use SERIAL as Primary Key? | 
| Date: | 2006-11-23 02:36:58 | 
| Message-ID: | 376682.53088.qm@web31801.mail.mud.yahoo.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general | 
> I am wonderring if it is a good practice to use SERIAL index as primary key, 
> as it is only available up to 9999999?
That isn't true.  It is much larger that that. If yor need more than that there is always
bigserial.
serial    = int4
bigserial = int8
""
The type names serial and serial4 are equivalent: both create integer columns. The type names
bigserial and serial8 work just the same way, except that they create a bigint column. bigserial
should be used if you anticipate the use of more than 231 identifiers over the lifetime of the
table. 
""
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/datatype-numeric.html#DATATYPE-SERIAL
> Currently i am dealing with storing LDAP users into Postgres and i am 
> looking for a better way to make use of the DN as primary key instead of 
> SERIAL index.
> 
> Any advice or suggestion is appreciated.
Here is a similar discussion that you may be enterested in:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2006-10/msg00024.php
Regards,
Richard Broersma Jr.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-11-23 04:02:13 | Re: Possible problem with PQescapeStringConn and | 
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-11-23 02:33:10 | Re: IS it a good practice to use SERIAL as Primary Key? |