Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: bytea vs. pg_dump |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 26269.1241554494@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | bytea vs. pg_dump (Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>) |
| Ответы |
Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
Re: bytea vs. pg_dump |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.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.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: