Re: Suggested improvement : Adjust SEQUENCES to accept an INCREMENT of functionname(parameters) instead of an integer
От | Lincoln Yeoh |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Suggested improvement : Adjust SEQUENCES to accept an INCREMENT of functionname(parameters) instead of an integer |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3.0.5.32.20010629000144.015f3bf0@192.228.128.13 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Suggested improvement : Adjust SEQUENCES to accept an INCREMENT of functionname(parameters) instead of an integer (Justin Clift <aa2@bigpond.net.au>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
At 12:10 PM 6/22/01 +1000, Justin Clift wrote: >Hi all, > >Am doing some work with sequences at the moment, and I'm finding it would be >useful to have sequences which use an increment amount decided by a function >call, instead of just a straight integer amount (as we presently do). > >For my example, I'd use this to add random positive increments (specifically >to avoid easy predictability of the sequence), but it would be quite flexible. To avoid predictability I usually prefer to have a sequence number and prepend/append a random number (generated from /dev/urandom or some other source of entropy). e.g. <bookingnumber>=<sequencenumber><random fixed X digit number> So in order to generate a valid booking number the attacker must get BOTH correct. For low security stuff like taxi/ticket booking numbers X=3 is probably good enough, but adding more is no problem. For web app session IDs I use <longrandomstring>.<sequencenumber>. That way queries can use the index: e.g. select stuff from sessiontable where seqnum=<sequencenumber> and seqstr=<longrandomstring>. Given your example, I don't really see why you would need what you want. Nor does it seem a better solution. If SEQUENCES are going to be changed, I'd rather prefer to have an option to use int8 sequences. But I believe at the moment there are other issues in postgresql that have to be fixed first before int4 sequences become a limiting factor/issue. Regards, Link.
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: