Re: timestamp as primary key?
От | John D. Burger |
---|---|
Тема | Re: timestamp as primary key? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 02D2DC33-6383-46EF-BF53-4F64423DE2DB@mitre.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: timestamp as primary key? (Tomasz Ostrowski <tometzky@batory.org.pl>) |
Ответы |
Re: timestamp as primary key?
|
Список | pgsql-general |
cckramer wrote: > I have table for online chat system that keep messages sent between > users. > Question: is it okay to use timestamp as primary key, or there is > possibility of collision? (Meaning two processes may INSERT into table > within same millisecond.) It is a web application. tometzky wrote: > If your insert fail you can always try again after some random short > time. But then the timestamp field does not accurately represent the actual time of the event. If you really want a primary key, and you really don't want to just use a sequence default, I would make the key a composite: PRIMARY KEY (user_id_from, user_id_to, message_time) This should cut way down on the possibility of key collision. - John D. Burger MITRE
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: