3 ms·
Immagine a world where every framework / API / database had its own incompatible UUID format. Without a standard specification that's where we would end up. Do
by zerodensity 2y ago
Immagine a world where every framework / API / database had its own incompatible UUID format. Without a standard specification that's where we would end up. Do you want to live in such a world?
- bruce511 2y agoIf you treat the uuid as an opaque binary random value (which is how programs -should- treat it) then variances between versions, or custom versions, have no effect. As long as they gave sufficient randomness etc, from a program perspective they are unique id's. There are already multiple versions in active use (4, 7 and arguably 8) so you really shouldn't be using the uuid as anything but a long-random-value. Yes, the database engine may appreciate one version over another for performance reasons, but that's irrelevant to most developers and programs.
- jagrsw 2y agoForget universally compatible UID formats. Frameworks, APIs, and databases only need consistency within their own ecosystem. Want visually recognizable unique identifiers? JAGRSW-UID-<192bit-input-from-urandom-encoded-in-base64> Need to shave off some bytes? JUID-<192bit-input-from-urandom-encoded-in-base64> Same byte size as UUIDs, arguably more "secure." Can I become an ACM Fellow for solving this problem now? Seriously, these UUID debates are about as sensible as arguing over XML.