Inside the longest Atlassian outage

Re:Inside the longest Atlassian outage by dylan604 on Wednesday April 13, 2022 @12:51PM (#31017002)

Would it be bad practice to append values to a GUID type of ID that would help a human recognize them? For instance, in this specific case they wanted app IDs as APP-XXXXX-XXXX-blahblah and CLOUD-XXXXX-blahblah.

I'm not looking to help their specific problems, but this is more from a general question I've thought of doing but never have done just because I'm sure I'd get laughed at for blazing my own trail

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Inside the longest Atlassian outage by magicalhippo on Wednesday April 13, 2022 @09:55PM (#31022592)

While we don't do exactly that, when pulling out lists of ID's like that for someone else, internal or external, we strive to include a description column as well.

This might be customer id and customer name, article number and article description, invoice id and invoice number etc.

Then it is usually very clear to the recipient what they've been handed.

Also, for internal autoinc-type id's, we mostly use sequence generators with non-overlapping "series". That is, we'll start first one at 1 million, second at 2 million or similar. Not perfect but can be useful.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Inside the longest Atlassian outage by bombcar on Wednesday April 13, 2022 @01:02PM (#31017142)

This is recommended in my experience, but you do have some potential issues when a UUID gets reused or repurposed.

WHENEVER a human is involved in the chain, UUIDs can be suspicious because there's no easy way to verify what it is, whereas a human has a good chance of realizing that $1,342.34 is probably not a valid date.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Inside the longest Atlassian outage by xeromal on Wednesday April 13, 2022 @01:42PM (#31017698)

I kind of dig it. Something that helps make things obvious to a human

[ Parent | on HN ]