Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: bytea vs. pg_dump |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4A00A84E.50409@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: bytea vs. pg_dump (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > 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. > > > 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
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: