feat: add automatic id to each row

[mswertz]

motivation:

• for RDF we need single id per row
• for Catalogue ui routing we need a row id to avoid the need to rebuild a complex row identifier for use in route

result:

• each row gets automatic id
• this id is used in the backend to have faster joins and easier backend code
• updates can still be done using key=1 columns
• id can be queried via Query.retrieveRows and Query.retrieveJson so it can be used in RDF
• decide if we make this visible in UI or not

[sonarqubecloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

100.0% Coverage
0.0% Duplication

[connoratrug]

For the frontend i would like a 'human readable' row id ( maybe a different story/usecase, but then are we going to have multilpe id's ? :S ) . Side note having previously work with RDF i know the 'sub optimal' experience of working with long chains of auto generated id's.

[esthervanenckevort]

For the frontend i would like a 'human readable' row id ( maybe a different story/usecase, but then are we going to have multilpe id's ? :S ) .

The suggestion that I had for the way we create the row id using a sequence does try to reduce the pain: using a single sequence in the schema ensures that an ID is always unique, and with a bigint it is still reasonably short in most cases, only if you have many rows you necessarily end up with large numbers. Expressing them as hexadecimal without leading zeros would still make them easier to handle.

Side note having previously work with RDF i know the 'sub optimal' experience of working with long chains of auto generated id's.

On the other hand, having meaningful ID's that don't match with the actual content is worse... And I have seen too many cases where things were changed later. ID's are machine readable and should be treated as such. There should be tooling around it that makes things also human readable, but I am aware that that is still lacking.

I think having a URL like http://www.example.com/petStore/pet/12AB3F1 is still acceptable.

The proposal I wrote is here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DlinRQnvvVH7wYee4jNhRUf1fwfgA_jUL32raOSroSs/edit#heading=h.xmg0aeh39vlf