Default index id

Riaan Backer

Hi Xano

To increase security, why don't you consider as a default that table id's are populated with GUID's instead of ascending id's

Daniel Rjeili

I think manually add an GUID field to the table and set the API to query this field instead the ID… what I am saying its “just” a turn around…to solve “part of the needs” but there is the table id references ( foreign keys ) that I think will not support right now… 

Riaan Backer

jip, fully aware of the manual way of doing this. My recommendation is to make this standard for any new database 

Sean Montgomery

Hey Riaan,

Uuid4 is on the roadmap. Ill see if we can document the roadmap to be more transparent on what is coming up.

Riaan Backer

 - do you have any dates for this?

Sean Montgomery

not for the id just yet... you now have the ability to generate a UUID4 field through the security function stack group or as a filter - so there is progress on this front. We are still seeing how we can change primary keys.

Ryan Anderson

Would love to see this too, especially if you could set a prefix.

I just spent time playing around with replacing the id in the response with my own random number field but it seems like too much overhead to be worth it: creating the new id, updating the array variable, unsetting the random number field from the response (using a filter b'c if you disable it from the table response you can't use it to update the id field...), etc

I was looking to use a format like 'user_11a4341ef0ed463e81309455491185ac' but id requires an integer so couldn't do that either.

Hopefully, you can retroactively apply this to existing databases (if they are empty).