Re: UUID as primary key
От | tsuraan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: UUID as primary key |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 84fb38e30910092214x1958c65dua0214f6b07a78512@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: UUID as primary key (Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc>) |
Ответы |
Re: UUID as primary key
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
> The most significant impact is that it takes up twice as much space, > including the primary key index. This means fewer entries per block, > which means slower scans and/or more blocks to navigate through. Still, > compared to the rest of the overhead of an index row or a table row, it > is low - I think it's more important to understand whether you can get > away with using a sequential integer, in which case UUID is unnecessary > overhead - or whether you are going to need UUID anyways. If you need > UUID anyways - having two primary keys is probably not worth it. Ok, that's what I was hoping. Out of curiosity, is there a preferred way to store 256-bit ints in postgres? At that point, is a bytea the most reasonable choice, or is there a better way to do it?
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: