> Yea tried this, but you only gain a bit, they're still long and ugly. It
> also produces characters that are not valid in a URL.

> Not preferable. Other ideas?

> On Friday, August 31, 2012 4:02:13 PM UTC-7, Kevin English wrote:

>> Base 64 is a little better:
>> http://sebastian.formzoo.com/2012/04/12/mongodb-shorten-the-objectid/

>> On Friday, August 31, 2012 5:48:28 PM UTC-5, Mase wrote:

>>> I understand that auto-incrementing Ids in MongoDB are not a great idea
>>> for multiple reasons. I've been reading up on this in multiple places, but
>>> I still have some need for it.

>>> Mainly it's about URLs for me. I don't generally have an issue with
>>> ObjectId's, but when they end up in the URL of a web app, they're very ugly
>>> and bad for SEO. It would be better if I could have a much smaller ID to
>>> place in the URL. These auto-incrementing IDs in my case would not be the
>>> single identifier, and in fact I would still use the ObjectId to be the
>>> primary key on the collection.

>>> But if I'm really not willing to keep ObjectId's in the URL, and the
>>> auto-increment IDs still need to be unique as well as scale - is there a
>>> better alternative given my needs?