From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: bytea vs. pg_dump |
Date: | 2009-05-05 20:57:50 |
Message-ID: | 4A00A84E.50409@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>> I'm thinking plain old pairs-of-hex-digits might be the best
>>> tradeoff if conversion speed is the criterion.
>>>
>
>
>> That's a lot less space-efficient than base64, though.
>>
>
> Well, base64 could give a 33% savings, but it's significantly harder
> to encode/decode. Also, since it has a much larger set of valid
> data characters, it would be *much* more likely to allow old-style
> formatting to be mistaken for new-style. Unless we can think of
> a more bulletproof format selection mechanism, that could be
> an overriding consideration.
>
>
>
Hex will already provide some space savings over our current encoding
method for most byteas anyway. It's not like we'd be making things less
efficient space-wise. And in compressed archives the space difference is
likely to dissolve to not very much, I suspect.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2009-05-05 22:01:43 | Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2009-05-05 20:32:35 | Re: bytea vs. pg_dump |