Bill Moran <wmoran at collaborativefusion.com> writes:
> I'm kind up in the air about this.  I would like to put together a patch
> that will support longer node IDs, but 10^15 seems arbitrary, and anything
> I'd change it to would be arbitrary as well.  The painful thing is that in
> a database where all tables have primary keys, it's not needed anyway.
>
> I expect that not a lot of people are having trouble with this, or there
> would be more discussion about it up till now, but I'm curious if
> anyone has ideas to contribute.

I hadn't noticed this particular issue before this thread pointed it
out.

My reaction is that I *really* dislike TABLE ADD KEY.  It has several
ways (aside from this way that I was unaware of) that it can "bite"
you, and is a sign of poor schema design.

To that end, one of my tasks of this afternoon was, in fact, setting
up a request in our ticketing system to "seek out and destroy" the
(happily fairly few) instances where we have such usage.

Removing TABLE ADD KEY from 1.2 would be unreasonable, but it seems to
me that we might consider deprecating or it (or worse) in 1.3.
-- 
"cbbrowne","@","ca.afilias.info"
<http://dba2.int.libertyrms.com/>
Christopher Browne
(416) 673-4124 (land)