From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
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: | 2009-05-06 11:51:14 |
Message-ID: | b42b73150905060451w1aa96b8dm7f53a30cce11bcc4@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> 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.
another nit with base64 is that properly encoded data requires
newlines according to the standard.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-05-06 12:02:13 | Re: bytea vs. pg_dump |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-05-06 11:30:04 | Re: bytea vs. pg_dump |