List:General Discussion« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Wm Mussatto Date:September 13 2010 10:48pm
Subject:RE: Unique ID's across multiple databases
View as plain text  

On Mon, September 13, 2010 15:37, Daevid Vincent wrote:
>>
-----Original Message-----
>>
From: Kiss D´┐Żniel
[mailto:niel@stripped]
>> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010
5:59 AM
>>
>> Well, thanks, but I'm afraid using
UUID's (even with hex
>> compression) is
>> kind of
a suicide, when it comes to performance.
>> This is a good
summary about the issues:
>>
http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/2007/03/13/to-uuid-or-not-to-uuid/
> 
> Is this UUID issue unique to mySQL or are there other
RDBMS's that handle
> it better (Postgress, Oracle, SQL Server,
etc?)
> 
> I too have a need for a unique identifier that
will "mesh" with other
> databases periodically. So that
a user in one "local" DB/server will get
> migrated to a
master DB which in turn will sync up with remote sites so
> that
all sites will have all users in it each night (for example).
>

> Having a mapping of UUID to local ID seems one way, but I feel
there is a
> lot of room for collisions and integrity issues that
way no?
> 
> There are some solutions at the bottom of
that blog post. Are those not
> good then? They seem interesting
to me.
Why does it have to be one field.and the SequenceID
Across servers the pair would be unique and within
a given server the Sequence ID is the equivalent of a "manual
auto-increment fields"ServerID is the local serverID.combined fields as well as the Sequence ID field perhaps.
SOURCE IP FROM HEADER:
************************************************
*Please block this
account's access to the     *
*internet until its cleaned up.  We are
basing *
*this on an analysis of the header NOT the FROM*
*address.                                      *
************************************************
------
William R. Mussatto
Systems Engineer
http://www.csz.com
909-920-9154


Thread