Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 20:40:08 -0700
From: Paul Ramsey <pramsey@refractions.net>
Subject: Re: uuid type for postgres
In-reply-to: <20050906135057.GA24136@granicus.if.org>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: Kevin Neufeld <kneufeld@refractions.net>
Message-id: <7CDBCE29-55BE-4EE3-8868-F50DB1E914F6@refractions.net>
MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v734)
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
References: <20050906135057.GA24136@granicus.if.org>

Just an FYI:

We also ended up rolling our own uuid type, against libuuid.  It  
seems that uuid is a widespread enough concept that implementors  
*will* be asked to support it, moderately often.  We *could* roll our  
own (were capable), others are not so lucky, and would have to point  
out the lack of a uuid type as a limitation of pgsql.  Which is too  
bad, given how relatively simple they are.

That said:

- linking against libuuid is fine for a contrib/ extension, but no  
good for a built-in type.  A real uuid would have to do a proper  
independent implementation of uuid creation within pgsql.
- we cannot snarf libuuid code, it is LGPL (though perhaps the author  
would re-license. if that is the *only* objection, it is well worth  
asking)

I think having a built-in uuid type is something that a large number  
of people will use.  Whether they use it will or badly is not our  
problem.  It is possible to build crappy databases with all the types  
that already exist, adding uuid is hardly going to bring the walls  
down.  Having uuid removes another excuse for people not doing a  
pgsql implementation.

I am not sure if I heard clearly from the core team that a self- 
contained, BSD-licensed uuid would be accepted(able)?  If so, I'll  
contact the libuuid author about a re-license (shortest path from A  
to B).

P.

On 6-Sep-05, at 6:50 AM, nathan wagner wrote:

>
>
> I have been in need of a uuid type and ran across the pguuid download
> by Xiongjian (Mike) Wang.  This wasn't really useful to me for two
> reasons: first, it is GPLed and I would prefer a more liberal license,
> secondly, it didn't compile cleanly on Mac OS 10.3, due to lack of a
> SIOCGETIFHWADDR (? i think, i can get the exact name if you want it)
> ioctl() under darwin.
>
> While I could dike out the code that calls it, that seems like a  
> suboptimal
> solution.  So after a bit of poking around the interweb i ran across
> Ralf Engelschall's ossp uuid library.  This compiled with minimal
> effort on mac os.  Some reading, and an evening later, i've made
> a server plugin with supporting SQL that implements an 'ossp_uuid'
> type.
>
> Now i have four questions:
>
> 1: Is it feasible for this to be included in the contrib section of
> the regular download?  The uuid library is a "notice of copyright"  
> style
> license, and I am willing to put my own code into the public domain.
>
> 2: Would just calling the type 'uuid' be better than 'ossp_uuid'?   
> It's
> certainly a nicer name.
>
> 3: Would it be possible to include such a type as a postgres extension
> to the usual SQL types.  It seems to me that having an officially
> supported type would be better than a user contributed type on the  
> grounds
> that you could then rely on it being avaiable if postgres was.
> In particular, installing it as an extension would require the  
> cooperation
> of the DBA, which may be infeasible in some environments.
>
> -- 
> Nathan Wagner
>
>
>