Re: Creating large database of MD5 hash values

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: "Decibel!" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Jon Stewart <jonathan(dot)l(dot)stewart(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Creating large database of MD5 hash values
Date: 2008-05-28 23:41:46
Message-ID: 11406.1212018106@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Decibel! wrote:
>> If you do this *please* post it. I really think it would be worth
>> while for us to have fixed-size data types for common forms of binary
>> data; MD5, SHA1 and SHA256 come to mind.

> Why do you think it would be worth while?

Given that the overhead for short bytea values is now only one byte
not four-plus-padding, the argument for such types is surely a lot
weaker than it was before 8.3.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2008-05-28 23:59:26 2GB or not 2GB
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2008-05-28 23:37:36 Re: Creating large database of MD5 hash values