|
On 02/19/2015 09:10 AM, brian wrote:
If your application understands/parses/makes use of the data in those 192 bites, I would reload with an additional unique id field. For the intended number of rows of data a sequence would be fine, though I'm partial to UUIDs. Alternatively map the 192 bytes to two fields and make a unique key of both of them. Third alternative would be to use a binary BitString a suggested by Brian.Hi folks, I have a single-user application which is growing beyond the fixed-format data files in which it currently holds its data, I need a proper database as the backend. The front end is written using Lazarus and FreePascal under Linux, should anyone feel that makes a difference. The database will need to grow to around 250,000 records. My problem is with the data field which is the (unique) key. It's really a single 192-bit integer (it holds various bits of bitmapped data) which I currently hold as six 32-bit integers, but can convert if needed when transferring the data. How would you advise that I hold this field in a Postgres database, given the requirement for the whole thing to be a unique key? The first 64 bits change relatively infrequently, the last 128 bits will change with virtually every record. The last 128 bits will ALMOST be unique in themselves, but not quite. :( Thanks, Brian. |
