我已经做了很多年了。永远不要遇到问题。

我通常设置我的数据库有一个表，其中包含所有的键和修改的日期等。我从没遇到过钥匙重复的问题。

它的唯一缺点是，当您编写一些查询来快速查找一些信息时，您需要进行大量的复制和粘贴键。你不再有简单易记的id了。

我已经做了很多年了。永远不要遇到问题。

我通常设置我的数据库有一个表，其中包含所有的键和修改的日期等。我从没遇到过钥匙重复的问题。

它的唯一缺点是，当您编写一些查询来快速查找一些信息时，您需要进行大量的复制和粘贴键。你不再有简单易记的id了。

我应该提一下，我在亚马逊上买了两个外接希捷驱动器，它们有相同的设备UUID，但PARTUUID不同。大概他们用来格式化硬盘的克隆软件也复制了UUID。

显然，UUID冲突更可能是由于有缺陷的克隆或复制过程而不是由于随机巧合而发生。在计算UUID风险时请记住这一点。

很安全:

一个人被陨石击中的年风险是 估计是170亿分之一的几率，也就是说 概率约为0.00000000006 (6 × 10−11)，相当于几率 在一年内创造出几十万亿uuid，并拥有一个uuid 复制。换句话说，只有在每次生成10亿个uuid之后 第二，在接下来的100年里，只创造一个的概率 重复率约为50%。

警告:

However, these probabilities only hold when the UUIDs are generated using sufficient entropy. Otherwise, the probability of duplicates could be significantly higher, since the statistical dispersion might be lower. Where unique identifiers are required for distributed applications, so that UUIDs do not clash even when data from many devices is merged, the randomness of the seeds and generators used on every device must be reliable for the life of the application. Where this is not feasible, RFC4122 recommends using a namespace variant instead.

来源:维基百科关于通用唯一标识符的文章的随机UUID重复概率部分(链接指向2016年12月的修订版，在编辑重新编辑该部分之前)。

另请参阅同一篇通用唯一标识符文章中关于同一主题的当前部分，碰撞。

摘自维基百科:

因此，任何人都可以创建UUID并使用 用它来表示某物 合理相信 标识符永远不会是 无意中被某人用于 其他东西

它还非常详细地解释了它的安全性。所以回答你的问题:是的，它足够安全。

我同意其他的答案。uuid对于几乎所有的实际用途都是足够安全的，当然对你来说也是如此。

但假设(假设)它们不是。

是否有更好的系统或某种类型的模式来缓解这个问题?

这里有一些方法:

Use a bigger UUID. For instance, instead of a 128 random bits, use 256 or 512 or ... Each bit you add to a type-4 style UUID will reduce the probability of a collision by a half, assuming that you have a reliable source of entropy2. Build a centralized or distributed service that generates UUIDs and records each and every one it has ever issued. Each time it generates a new one, it checks that the UUID has never been issued before. Such a service would be technically straight-forward to implement (I think) if we assumed that the people running the service were absolutely trustworthy, incorruptible, etcetera. Unfortunately, they aren't ... especially when there is the possibility of governments' security organizations interfering. So, this approach is probably impractical, and may be3 impossible in the real world.

1 - If uniqueness of UUIDs determined whether nuclear missiles got launched at your country's capital city, a lot of your fellow citizens would not be convinced by "the probability is extremely low". Hence my "nearly all" qualification. 2 - And here's a philosophical question for you. Is anything ever truly random? How would we know if it wasn't? Is the universe as we know it a simulation? Is there a God who might conceivably "tweak" the laws of physics to alter an outcome? 3 - If anyone knows of any research papers on this problem, please comment.