| From: | Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers mailing list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Przemysław Sztoch <przemyslaw(at)sztoch(dot)pl>, Sergey Prokhorenko <sergeyprokhorenko(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)au>, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Nick Babadzhanian <pgnickb(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mat Arye <mat(at)timescaledb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Kyzer Davis (kydavis)" <kydavis(at)cisco(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "brad(at)peabody(dot)io" <brad(at)peabody(dot)io>, Kirk Wolak <wolakk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: UUID v7 |
| Date: | 2024-01-19 08:25:51 |
| Message-ID: | B4034B63-6C3F-46B1-A26F-23B4B8CC72D6@yandex-team.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 19 Jan 2024, at 08:24, David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
> You are mixing POSIX and ISO-8601 conventions and, as noted in our appendix, they disagree on the direction that is positive.
Thanks! Now everything seems on its place.
I want to include in the patch following tests:
-- extract UUID v1, v6 and v7 timestamp
SELECT uuid_extract_time('C232AB00-9414-11EC-B3C8-9F6BDECED846') = 'Tuesday, February 22, 2022 2:22:22.00 PM GMT+05:00';
SELECT uuid_extract_time('1EC9414C-232A-6B00-B3C8-9F6BDECED846') = 'Tuesday, February 22, 2022 2:22:22.00 PM GMT+05:00';
SELECT uuid_extract_time('017F22E2-79B0-7CC3-98C4-DC0C0C07398F') = 'Tuesday, February 22, 2022 2:22:22.00 PM GMT+05:00';
How do you think, will it be stable all across buildfarm? Or should we change anything to avoid false positives inferred from different timestamp parsing?
> On 19 Jan 2024, at 07:58, Lukas Fittl <lukas(at)fittl(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Note how calling the uuidv7 function again after having called it with a fixed future timestamp, returns the future timestamp, even though it should return the current time.
Thanks for the review.
Well, that was intentional. But now I see it's kind of confusing behaviour. I've changed it to more expected version.
Also, I've added some documentation on all functions.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v11-0001-Implement-UUID-v7-as-per-IETF-draft.patch | application/octet-stream | 16.2 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2024-01-19 08:34:42 | Re: index prefetching |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2024-01-19 08:20:52 | Re: subscription disable_on_error not working after ALTER SUBSCRIPTION set bad conninfo |