From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [RFC] new digest datatypes, or generic fixed-len hex types? |
Date: | 2009-07-27 17:54:59 |
Message-ID: | b42b73150907271054v742ea9b4o535fa28bf8498706@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> We've developed some code to implement fixed-length datatypes for well
>>>> known digest function output (MD5, SHA1 and the various SHA2 types).
>>>> These types have minimal overhead and are quite complete, including
>>>> btree and hash opclasses.
>>>> We're wondering about proposing them for inclusion in pgcrypto.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wasn't this proposed and rejected before? (Or more to the point,
>>> why'd you bother? The advantage over bytea seems negligible.)
>>>
>>
>> well, one nice things about the fixed length types is that you can
>> keep your table from needing a toast table when you have a bytea in
>> it.
>
> Can't you just set storage on the column to MAIN to stop it being stored in
> a toast table?
of course.
hm. would the input/output functions for the fixed length types be
faster? what is the advantage of the proposal?
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2009-07-27 17:59:56 | Re: proposal: support empty string as separator for string_to_array |
Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2009-07-27 17:53:07 | Re: SE-PostgreSQL Specifications |