Re: YAGT (yet another GUID thread) - Mailing list pgsql-general

From David Helgason
Subject Re: YAGT (yet another GUID thread)
Date
Msg-id 486FF848-476D-11D8-BAA4-000A9566DA8A@uti.is
Whole thread Raw
In response to YAGT (yet another GUID thread)  (David Garamond <lists@zara.6.isreserved.com>)
Responses Re: YAGT (yet another GUID thread)  (David Garamond <lists@zara.6.isreserved.com>)
List pgsql-general
Obvious... when you think about it. I didn't :)

I'm switching right away. The notation doesn't really do anything for
me, but that's fine. I've been using bit(128), but always suspected
that of being unoptimal (for no particular reason).

Anyone know of any caveats about indexing or such? I'm assuming not.

d.


On 15. jan 2004, at 15:17, David Garamond wrote:

> Has anyone tried [ab]using inet or cidr for storing GUID (or for
> storing 128bit numbers or hashes or similar stuffs)? It has a nice
> property in that one can use hexadecimal notation (like
> 'FEDC:BA98:7654:3210:FEDC:BA98:7654:3210') when inserting it. Plus
> IPv6 is 128bit too.
>
> --
> dave
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if
> your
>      joining column's datatypes do not match
>


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Richard Huxton
Date:
Subject: Re: parse error in function
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Using regular expressions in LIKE