Re: Fixed length datatypes. WAS [GENERAL] UUID's as

[Thomas Hallgren <thomas(at)tada(dot)se>]

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jim,
>
>> I agree about splitting the utilities, except that I think the database
>> should be able to generate UUIDs somehow.
>
> There is a GUID add-in, and someone is working on a 2nd one.  UUIDs 
are not part of the SQL standard, and we've only seen sporadic demand 
for them (and different types each time) so I can't imagine one making 
it further than contrib real soon.
>
> Also, one could argue that UUIDs are a foot gun, so they're not 
exactly the type of thing we want to advocate in advance of demand.
>

Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> It seems to me that maybe the backend should include a 16-byte fixed
> length object (after all, we've got 1, 2, 4 and 8 bytes already) and
> then people can use that to build whatever they like, using domains,
> for example...
>
So how about the split? I.e. just add a 16 byte data type and forget all 
about UUID's for now.

Regards,
Thomas Hallgren