3 ms·

Yep. And several of them seem like issues that would be very difficult to reproduce outside of production (e.g. overflowing primary key index), so it makes sens

Yep. And several of them seem like issues that would be very difficult to reproduce outside of production (e.g. overflowing primary key index), so it makes sense that they were not caught earlier

dx034 6y ago
It's actually an error I've seen multiple times in the past, and I'm not even working with databases full time. I do think it's surprising that no one had thought of implementing at least checks for these conditions.
- capableweb 6y ago
  Yeah, I think most people who touch/interact with backend/database code, even if not actually backend/DB developers, have a reaction nowadays to seeing auto-incremental IDs because it's famously hard to scale to any distributed architecture + introduces issues when you hit the limit. Projects started in the last three years that I've collaborated/been part of have all ditched the auto incremental IDs.
  - baq 6y ago
    Auto incrementing integer ids have some very desirable properties though. Not sure what you replaced them with.
    - dijit 6y ago
      Something I see more and more is a primary key based on guid/uuid; I'm not fully aware of the merits of either approach, so I'm just putting the info I have at hand out there.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]