3 ms·
Noted. The single numerical namespace, from a technical perspective, is a double-edged sword. On one hand, you need to have a single, monotonically-increasing-
by q3k 6y ago
Noted.
The single numerical namespace, from a technical perspective, is a double-edged sword. On one hand, you need to have a single, monotonically-increasing-ish number in your model, which is annoying when trying to design a globally distributed system. On the other hand, when users are (subconsciously) taught to not look that much into the actual numbers, there's opportunities to cheat, as an extra hundred here and a few missed numbers there won't be noticed but help with technical implementation details (you can pre-allocate number ranges, encode some technical details in the number, even just use snowflake ids, etc).
With namespaced 'small numbers', as you said, per-slug numbers will be scrutinized by users - if they file FOO-223 now and FOO-105 later, they will notice and they will be confused / surprised / unhappy. However, with per-namespace numbers you're at least given an opportunity to shard and have a less contested model.
Approaching this as optional handles is probably a good future extension and would fit in the existing model. I'll keep this in mind when I get back to developing bugless. Thanks for your input!