Re: Robust unique identifiers?

On 21 Jan 2005 14:11:21 -0800, "Pete" <pmg4345_at_yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>The system needs to be non-DBMS-specific, needs to be able to run in
>multiple instances simultaneously (although this is only a
>hypothetical, later requirement) and needs to be as robust as possible
>throughout DB restores, general maintenance and against rogue DBAs
>resetting IDENTITYs and the like.

There is no such thing as a non-DBMS specific application. Any application developed against MS SQL server or Sybase, will show abysmal performance against Oracle.
Customers all over the world suffer from developers trying to avoid what they mistakenly call 'vendor lock-in'. That they lock those customers in the Evil Empire of William H Gates III they obviously they don't care about.

I have been looking at applications developing their own locking (Yuck!!) and their own counter mechanism. Obviously, the counter mechanism doesn't scale, and as this specific application commits EVERY individual insert and update, the performance of this 'application' is abysmal.

There is also no such thing as protection against 'rogue DBAs'. DBAs are either to be trusted or to be fired. There is however such a thing as 'rogue developers'. As far as I am concerned they outnumber the hardworking DBAs, trying to survive the consequences of running non-DBMS specific applications.

I don't envy the customers who are going to be exposed to your 'non-DBMS specific system'. It will cost them big bucks, either in the form of extra hardware, or in the form of lawyers.

--
Sybrand Bakker, Senior Oracle DBA