Re: unique ascending numbers
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2003
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 50196
interpreted = N
texte = Chris List Recipient wrote:> I would guess that multiple cart numbers generated in the same epoc second> are not necessarily ascending due to the random (not ascending) characters> appended. Have you actually observed multiple carts being generated in a single second or are you SWAG[1]ing? My understanding of what Grant described about the proprietary cart format was that the subsecond uniquifiers were an incrementing WebDNA kernal counter. Random number generation is not sufficient to be demonstratably unique, since the sequence 1,2,3,4,5,5,5,5,5,4,5,3,2,1 can be considered part of a random sequence. Additionally, random number generation is typically very processor intensive (without a hardware RNG), so it is not really suitable to be doing lots of them when the CPU is already being asked to handle lots of traffic.John[1] http://www.netlingo.com/lookup.cfm?term=SWAG-- John PeacockDirector of Information Research and TechnologyRowman & Littlefield Publishing Group4720 Boston WayLanham, MD 20706301-459-3366 x.5010fax 301-429-5747-------------------------------------------------------------This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list
.To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Chris List Recipient wrote:> I would guess that multiple cart numbers generated in the same epoc second> are not necessarily ascending due to the random (not ascending) characters> appended. Have you actually observed multiple carts being generated in a single second or are you SWAG[1]ing? My understanding of what Grant described about the proprietary cart format was that the subsecond uniquifiers were an incrementing WebDNA kernal counter. Random number generation is not sufficient to be demonstratably unique, since the sequence 1,2,3,4,5,5,5,5,5,4,5,3,2,1 can be considered part of a random sequence. Additionally, random number generation is typically very processor intensive (without a hardware RNG), so it is not really suitable to be doing lots of them when the CPU is already being asked to handle lots of traffic.John[1] http://www.netlingo.com/lookup.cfm?term=SWAG-- John PeacockDirector of Information Research and TechnologyRowman & Littlefield Publishing Group4720 Boston WayLanham, MD 20706301-459-3366 x.5010fax 301-429-5747-------------------------------------------------------------This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list .To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Web Archive of this list is at: http://webdna.smithmicro.com/
John Peacock
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
Summary search -- speed (1997)
Hiding HTML and page breaks (1997)
[shownext] and descending order (1997)
File Upload (1997)
taxrate (1999)
Bannerad Demo (1998)
Database Options (1997)
Running _every_ page through WebCat ? (1997)
WebCommerce: Folder organization ? (1997)
OT: Where to turn (2003)
Credit Card Gateways (2005)
Date Bug (1998)
WebCatalog for Postcards ? (1997)
Getting total number of items ordered (1997)
Multiple Pulldowns/Gary (1997)
Problem 2 of 2 (was: Shipping Confusion) (2000)
Sort Order on a page search (1997)
Progress !! WAS: Trouble with formula.db (1997)
Using EIMS instead of Emailer (1998)
WCS Newbie question (1997)