Boost logo

Boost Users :

From: chengm349_at_[hidden]
Date: 2021-07-28 21:19:43


how about 64-bit value if we ignore timestamps only part recommendation?

Sent from my Huawei Mobile


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Boost-users] UUID
From: Richard Damon via Boost-users
To: boost-users@lists.boost.org
CC: Richard Damon


On 7/27/21 11:34 PM, Ming Cheng via Boost-users wrote:
>
> I have a UUID requirement as:
>
> * Each session will also be represented with a Universally Unique ID
> (UUID), which should be a current timestamp
> * a unique UUID value set by the customer as a 64-bit value. CME
> Group recommends using the system timestamp which represents the
> number of microseconds since epoch (Jan 1, 1970) as the timestamp.
> * I also need to save it in a Linux file and rebuild the UUID from
> the saved value.
>
> Wondering whether boost UUID code can support it?  I checked online
> document and seems to me quite difficulty except archiving.
>
My first thought is someone doesn't know what a UUID is. 'The Current
Timestamp' is NOT a UUID, and the chance of duplicates is going to be
reasonable high if sessions might be started on multiple machines at
about the same time.

--
Richard Damon

_______________________________________________
Boost-users mailing list
Boost-users@lists.boost.org
https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

Boost-users list run by williamkempf at hotmail.com, kalb at libertysoft.com, bjorn.karlsson at readsoft.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, wekempf at cox.net