Re: Text format protocol representation

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Text format protocol representation
Date: 2003-05-14 03:48:58
Message-ID: 21139.1052884138@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> What's the rationale for not including the trailing zero byte in the
> protocol representation of the text format?

History, mostly --- we have not done it in the past.

> The output functions of data
> types generate one, and the client most likely wants one, so it seems
> unreasonable that the protocol cuts it out and the client has to put it
> back. Is the bandwidth saved worth the extra computation?

Those two considerations seem about a wash to me. So I'm willing to bow
to backwards compatibility as the deciding factor. Do you have a fourth
or fifth issue to put into the argument?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sailesh Krishnamurthy 2003-05-14 07:33:59 Re: LISTEN/NOTIFY benchmarks?
Previous Message Bruce Badger 2003-05-14 00:54:13 Re: Text format protocol representation