"A couple of years ago we decided to standardize the use of sequential integer IDs as primary keys, due to the significant performance issues of non-time-ordere

"A couple of years ago we decided to standardize the use of sequential integer IDs as primary keys, due to the significant performance issues of non-time-ordered UUIDs." From the article. I'd like a lot more exposition on that, since it goes against some of what used to motivate UUID use in the first place. Sequential ordering across distributed nodes isn't a fun thing to do, and even if you navigate the coding, the network agreement makes it really slow. Do they mean "sequential enough" but some locality of the node that generated it? And I guess that prng can sometimes have some performance bottlenecks, but compared to doing locks on a single incremented integer? Yeah, I don't really get this, lots of usual "better" "faster" etc without actual numbers to back it up or detailed algorithmic discussions. As you basically said, wake me up if it's good enough to get into the standard vetted libraries of UUID generation.