| From: | Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik(at)postgres(dot)ai> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sergey Prokhorenko <sergeyprokhorenko(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers mailing list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Przemysław Sztoch <przemyslaw(at)sztoch(dot)pl>, 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: | 2024-01-25 04:41:43 |
| Message-ID: | CAM527d-REt6HZDZmynpZ1gF-gwCa31ntGq=xCmDbXaguvEbVbA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 8:40 PM Nikolay Samokhvalov <nik(at)postgres(dot)ai> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 1:52 PM Sergey Prokhorenko <
> sergeyprokhorenko(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:
>
>> That's right! There is no point in waiting for the official approval of
>> the new RFC, which obviously will not change anything. I have been a
>> contributor to this RFC
>> <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-uuidrev-rfc4122bis-14.html#name-acknowledgements>
>> for several years, and I can testify that every aspect imaginable has been
>> thoroughly researched and agreed upon. Nothing new will definitely
>> appear in the new RFC.
>>
>
> From a practical point of view, these two things are extremely important
> to have to support partitioning. It is better to implement limitations than
> throw them away.
>
> Without them, this functionality will be of a very limited use in
> databases. We need to think about large tables – which means partitioning.
>
apologies -- this was a response to another email from you:
> "Other people" think that extracting the timestamp from UUIDv7 in
violation of the new RFC, and generating UUIDv7 from the timestamp were
both terrible and poorly thought out ideas. The authors of the new RFC had
very good reasons to prohibit this. And the problems you face are the best
confirmation of the correctness of the new RFC. It’s better to throw all
this gag out of the official patch. Don't tempt developers to break the new
RFC with these error-producing functions.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2024-01-25 04:53:30 | Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations |
| Previous Message | Nikolay Samokhvalov | 2024-01-25 04:40:30 | Re: UUID v7 |