spec VS Hasura

Can use ULID to "fix" some issues

https://github.com/ulid/spec

Both ULID and UUID v7 have a time code component which can be extracted.

It would be best for indexing to store the actual value in binary, though not strictly necessary as these later UUID standards (unlike conventional UUIDs) use time code prefixes (so indexing clusters.)

https://uuid7.com/

https://github.com/ulid/spec

UUIDv7 is a nice idea, and should probably be what people use by default instead of UUIDv4.

For the curious:

* UUIDv4 are 128 bits long, 122 bits of which are random, with 6 bits used for the version. Traditionally displayed as 32 hex characters with 4 dashes, so 36 alphanumeric characters, and compatible with anything that expects a UUID.

* UUIDv7 are 128 bits long, 48 bits encode a unix timestamp with millisecond precision, 6 bits are for the version, and 74 bits are random. You're expected to display them the same as other UUIDs, and should be compatible with basically anything that expects a UUID. (Would be a very odd system that parses a UUID and throws an error because it doesn't recognise v7, but I guess it could happen, in theory?)

* ULIDs (https://github.com/ulid/spec) are 128 bits long, 48 bits encode a unix timestamp with millisecond precision, 80 bits are random. You're expected to display them in Crockford's base32, so 26 alphanumeric characters. Compatible with almost everything that expects a UUID (since they're the right length). Spec has some dumb quirks if followed literally but thankfully they mostly don't hurt things.

* KSUIDs (https://github.com/segmentio/ksuid) are 160 bits long, 32 bits encode a timestamp with second precision and a custom epoch of May 13th, 2014, and 128 bits are random. You're expected to display them in base62, so 27 alphanumeric characters. Since they're a different length, they're not compatible with UUIDs.

I quite like KSUIDs; I think base62 is a smart choice. And while the timestamp portion is a trickier question, KSUIDs use 32 bits which, with second precision (more than good enough), means they won't overflow for well over a century. Whereas UUIDv7s use 48 bits, so even with millisecond precision (not needed) they won't overflow for something like 8000 years. We can argue whether 100 years us future proof enough (I'd argue it probably is), but 8000 years is just silly. Nobody will ever generate a compliant UUIDv7 with any of the first several bits aren't 0. The only downside to KSUIDs is the length isn't UUID compatible (and arguably, that they don't devote 6 bits to a compliant UUID version).

Still feels like there's room for improvement, but for now I think I'd always pick UUIDv7 over UUIDv4 unless there's an very specific reason not to.

I'd love for Postgres to adopt ULID as a first class variant of the same basic 128bit wide binary optimized column type they use for UUIDs, but I don't expect they will, while its "popular" its not likely popular enough to have support for them to maintain it in the long run... Also the smart money ahead of time would have been for the ULID spec to sacrifice a few data bits to leave the version specifying sections of the bit field layout unused in the ULID binary spec (https://github.com/ulid/spec#binary-layout-and-byte-order) for the sake of future compatibility with "proper" UUIDs... Performing one big bulk bitfield modification to a PostgreSQL column would have been much less painful than re-computing appropriate UUIDv7 (or UUIDv8s for some reason) and then having to perform a primary key update on every row in the table.

Many people had the same idea. For example ULID https://github.com/ulid/spec is more compact and stores the time so it is lexically ordered.

> 2. ORMs do not hide SQL nastiness.

This is certainly true!

I mean: ORMs are now well known to "make the easy queries slightly more easy, while making intermediate queries really hard and complex queries impossible".

I think the are of ORMs is over. It simply did not deliver.

If a book on SQL is --say-- 100 pages, a book on Hibernate is 400 pages. So much to learn just to make the easy queries slightly easier to type? Just not worth it.

I prefer jooq any day over ORMs. And dont get me started over what tools like Hasuna have to offer.

There are also some languages (forgot the names) that are SQL-done-right. Select in the back, more type safe, more logic, more in the same steps as the query gets executed. These need to be adopted by PG and MySQL and we're good to go. (IMHO)

https://www.jooq.org/

https://hasura.io/

[4] https://github.com/hasura/graphql-engine/blob/master/architecture/live-queries.md

Another strategy is to model access control declaratively and enforce it in the application layer. ZenStack (built above Prisma ORM) and Hasura are good examples of this approach. The following code shows how access policies are defined with ZenStack and how a secured CRUD API can be derived automatically.

Today, this ecosystem is going strong with new providers like Hasura, AppWrite and Supabase powering millions of projects. There are a few reasons people choose this style of hosting, especially if they are more comfortable with frontend development. BaaS lets them set up a database in a secure way, expose some business logic on top of the data, and connect via a dev-friendly SDK from their app or website code to save data easily. These modern tools build a blend of managed database with curated plugins such as authentication, great admin dashboards, and function as a service type capability - all in one package, and often offered as a integrated hosted service.

Hi! If you’ve ever thought about something like using GraphQL for something like this.. You might like Hasura. (Obligatory I work for Hasura)

We’ve got an OpenAPI import and you can setup cron-jobs or one-off jobs and do things like load in headers from the environment variables to pass through. There isn’t currently an easy journey for chaining multiple calls together without writing any code at all, but you can wrap pretty much any API endpoint via OpenAPI import or a custom action, and you can even make minor edits to things like the API contract format to change aliases/naming.

Our goal is to join all the things, databases and API’s. Most people know us for instant GraphQL API’s that give you CRUD on your database, but we also wrap APIs.

Not sure if something like this would fit your use-case and do check out some of the other things mentioned, but depending what you are trying to do I think Hasura might potentially work.

You can find out more here: https://hasura.io

Nested Mutation - 113 thumbs up, and still open since 2019... another case of not listening to the users?

Hasura is an open-source real-time GraphQL API server with a strong authorization layer on your database. You can subscribe to database events via webhooks. It can combine multiple API servers into one unified graphQL API. Hasura is a great tool to build any CRUD GraphQL API. Hasura does not have any authentication mechanisms; e.g., you need an auth server to handle sign-up and sign-in.