3 ms·
I don't see how it is at all a gamble if you understand the trade-offs. If there is no fatal flaw with the inaccurate/non-deterministic sorting that wall-clock
by jakevn 8y ago
I don't see how it is at all a gamble if you understand the trade-offs.
If there is no fatal flaw with the inaccurate/non-deterministic sorting that wall-clock prefix provides and one is utilizing optimistic concurrency (strict create on PK, abort/retry on conflict), I don't see how it is unsafe
- munk-a 8y agoThe gamble is the removal of a central key registry. If you are assigning these UUID/ULIDs as... UIDs then you need to be able to assign them uniquely... if multiple servers/threads/whatevers can generate and assign them independently then there is a chance you'll suffer from ID collision... it's incredibly rare though.
- jakevn 8y agoBut with optimistic concurrency, why is this a gamble? It's an overhead that comes as a result of the trade-offs, sure, but it's a finite cost. Collision can be handled without breaking anything at the cost of implementation complexity.