(We're getting way off topic) but I think the problem with auto increment is that it can't be sharded easily since multiple shards can increment to the same value. If you then try to go back to random ids you're now stuck with 8 bytes which will conflict once every billion items or so. I guess it's pretty extreme premature optimization but I think UUID is nicer for future-proofing at the cost of some performance. (I would love to see benchmarks to know exactly how much performance I am giving up though)By the way uuidv1 is already prefixed by a timestamp! But unfortunately it doesn't use a sortable version of the time so it doesn't work for clustering the ids into the same page. I think it was really designed for distributed systems where you would want evenly distributed ids anyway.
takeda|6 years ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrMbzHdPLKM
It ends up being a pitch for Aurora at the end (as with any presentation from AWS folks), but it has tons of useful information for standard Postgres.
pas|6 years ago
takeda|6 years ago
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-createsequence.h...