From: mark@mark.mielke.cc
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Jonah H. Harris <jonah.harris@gmail.com>
Cc: josh@agliodbs.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, nathan wagner <nw@hydaspes.if.org>
Subject: Re: uuid type for postgres
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 18:06:48 -0400
Message-ID: <20050906220648.GD3069@mark.mielke.cc> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20921.1126043674@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <20050906135057.GA24136@granicus.if.org>
<20050906144930.GA27641@mark.mielke.cc>
<200509061002.43803.josh@agliodbs.com>
<36e6829205090612575b954f38@mail.gmail.com>
<20050906203811.GA3069@mark.mielke.cc>
<20921.1126043674@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 05:54:34PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't see any "big opposition". People are simply questioning the
> idea whether it belongs in core PG. The reason we don't want to accept
> everything-and-the-kitchen-sink in core is that we have only limited
> manpower to maintain it. So you've got to justify that we should spend
> our effort here and not elsewhere. There's a fair amount of nearly
> ...
> been there awhile. So one of the questions that's going to be asked is
> how useful/popular it's really going to be.
Sounds reasonable, and certainly no more than I expected. If Nathan
hadn't raised the issue, it probably would have been a few months
before I raised it myself.
> One thing that is raising my own level of concern quite a bit is the
> apparent portability issues. Code that isn't completely portable is a
> huge maintainability problem; in particular, stuff that requires
> system-dependent behavior used nowhere else in Postgres is a real pain.
> It sounds like the UUID code expects to be able to get at the machine's
> MAC address, which suggests serious issues in (a) relying on
> not-too-standard APIs, (b) possible protection issues (will an
> unprivileged process be able to get at the MAC address?), and (c)
> ill-defined behavior on machines with more or less than one MAC address.
> Not to mention that MAC addresses aren't so unique as all that.
I'll try to prepare an answer for this. (I started to write a lot of
information - but is it unverified from memory, and perhaps should be
more authoritative before presented as truth)
> The bottom line is that we're willing to listen, but it's not by any
> means a slam dunk to get this into the distribution.
Sounds good.
Cheers,
mark
--
mark@mielke.cc / markm@ncf.ca / markm@nortel.com __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: mark@mark.mielke.cc, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, jonah.harris@gmail.com, nw@hydaspes.if.org
Subject: Re: uuid type for postgres
In-Reply-To: <20050906220648.GD3069@mark.mielke.cc>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox