Would you be able to map the 20+ character job ID to something more human readable / user friendly. An incrementing integer seems to work well in other render queuing software.
There aren’t any plans to change the ID format. The GUID format is actually recommended for MongoDB, and should work well with any future database backend we might support.
Why the need for a user friendly ID? Even an incrementing integer starts to become less friendly once you hit a higher digit count.
Are you asking why a user friendly job id is better than a non-user friendly job id? I’ll assume that’s rhetorical 
Assuming there are easy ways to copy the ID from the monitor and search for a job by ID, is the “friendliness” still important?
This is not a MAJOR issue but from a user standpoint, I do only can see only advantages in using a regular incrementing integer vs. a 32 character GUID. And now that deadline 6 has a db, it seems like it would be a fairly easy change to make.
From my survey of other render farm managers, I’m unable to find one that doesn’t use an incrementing regular integer aside from deadline. Its quite possible that I missed some, of course, so I’m ready to stand corrected.
Here are some MongoDB docs on the subject:
docs.mongodb.org/manual/tutorial … ing-field/
Obviously performance and scalability has to take precedence here, so we will be sticking with the GUID-based IDs.
However, in beta 10, the job ID will now be shown in a read-only field in the job properties dialog. So if you need to copy it to the clipboard for whatever reason, it should be much easier than before.