RE: Re: UUID vs. Sequential ID as Primary

I think MWF hit most of the high points, ESPECIALLY, “it depends” and “trusting” the generator of the UUIDs.

I’ve actually seen cases where “We THOUGHT the UUID was unique”; but data can persist for a LONG time, in many cases longer than whatever code or application generates the UUID.

Peter makes some good points about minimizing database round trips (SQL*NET Wait for Client, anyone?). I would assert that the “best of both worlds” could be had by using a DATABASE sequence as the primary key; then storing the UUID as a separate, uniquely indexed field. Storage and CPU are relatively inexpensive.

Clay Jackson
Database Solutions Sales Engineer
[cid:image001.jpg_at_01DA8BF9.9F3F8A30]<https://www.quest.com/solutions/database-performance-monitoring/> clay.jackson_at_quest.com<mailto:clay.jackson_at_quest.com> office 949-754-1203 mobile 425-802-9603

From: oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org <oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org> On Behalf Of ahmed.fikri_at_t-online.de Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2024 7:35 AM
To: peter.m.gram_at_gmail.com
Cc: list, oracle <oracle-l_at_freelists.org> Subject: AW: Re: UUID vs. Sequential ID as Primary

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not follow guidance, click links, or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Thanks for the hint, you’re right, one can use that. The problem is that when working with hibernate (or any other client lib) one doesn’t want to go to the database to fetch the IDs when creating an entry on the client side. While one does want to create the ID uniquely, it should be done with minimum visiting the database (using sequences has now been optimally solved e.g. hilo algorithm, not just for Oracle, but almost all other databases).

I’m interested in our experts have to say about this: is the trend of using UUID legitimate, or is using numbers better?

Gesendet mit der Telekom Mail App<http://www.t-online.de/service/redir/emailmobilapp_ios_smartphone_footerlink.htm>

-----Original-Nachricht-----
Von: Peter Gram <peter.m.gram_at_gmail.com<mailto:peter.m.gram_at_gmail.com>> Betreff: Re: UUID vs. Sequential ID as Primary Datum: 11.04.2024, 16:10 Uhr
An: <ahmed.fikri_at_t-online.de<mailto:ahmed.fikri_at_t-online.de>> CC: list, oracle <oracle-l_at_freelists.org<mailto:oracle-l_at_freelists.org>> Hi

If you use the returning clause on the first statement you don’t get a extra round trip to the database to get the sequence.

Med venlig hilsen

Peter Gram
Sæbyholmsvej 18
2500 Valby
Mobile: (+45) 5374 7107
Email: peter.m.gram_at_gmail.com<mailto:peter.m.gram_at_gmail.com>

On Wed, 10 Apr 2024 at 23.38, ahmed.fikri_at_t-online.de<mailto:ahmed.fikri_at_t-online.de> < ahmed.fikri_at_t-online.de<mailto:ahmed.fikri_at_t-online.de>> wrote:

Hi there,

Once more, a question about fundamentals:

In several Hibernate projects, I've observed developers leaning towards using UUIDs as primary keys instead of numerical values. This preference likely stems from the avoidance of sequences for numerical primary keys, which necessitate round trips to the database after each insertion. Additionally, there's a concern about potential contention with sequences, and some developers may prefer to avoid predictability in the next generated value. Personally, I remain skeptical about the widespread use of UUIDs due to their larger storage footprint (both in tables and indexes) compared to numerical IDs. Numeric IDs also offer benefits in issue analysis. However, it's worth noting that Hibernate employs algorithms to minimize round trips to the database, effectively reducing their impact. Could you please share your experience and preference? What choice would you make?

Regards

Ahmed


--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l






(image/jpeg attachment: image001.jpg)