Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 17:39:19 +0200
From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@sigpipe.cz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: mark@mark.mielke.cc, "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>,
	josh@agliodbs.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
	nathan wagner <nw@hydaspes.if.org>
Subject: Re: uuid type for postgres
Message-ID: <20050907153919.GC2295@isis.sigpipe.cz>
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>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20921.1126043674@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

# tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us / 2005-09-06 17:54:34 -0400:
> There's a fair amount of nearly
> unmaintained cruft in the core distro already (eg, the never-finished
> "line" datatype ... or the entire rtree index module ...) and a datatype
> that might be used by only a few people is a likely candidate to become
> an unmaintained backwater.  And yet it's hard to get rid of stuff that's
> been there awhile.  So one of the questions that's going to be asked is
> how useful/popular it's really going to be.
 
    We'd have use for uuid in tables of N*10^6 rows (N<10 in most cases).

    I'm far from claiming to be an experienced C programmer, but count
    me in for whatever I'll be able to do.

    I think that coming up with code that meets the general criteria for
    inclusion in PostgreSQL first, before it's considered for inclusion,
    is a reasonable thing to do.

> One thing that is raising my own level of concern quite a bit is the
> apparent portability issues.

    That's understood.

-- 
How many Vietnam vets does it take to screw in a light bulb?
You don't know, man.  You don't KNOW.
Cause you weren't THERE.             http://bash.org/?255991