From: | aaime74 <andrea(dot)aime(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Status of binary protocol usage? |
Date: | 2007-06-24 16:21:56 |
Message-ID: | 11276153.post@talk.nabble.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Tom Lane-2 wrote:
>
> aaime74 <andrea(dot)aime(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> A profiler informs me that quite a big of time is spent in the
>> PGBytea.toBytes(byte[]s) method, which is used only if the transfer
>> occurrs in text mode.
>
> That hardly seems like a killer argument for switching to binary
> (which has got a boatload of disadvantages of its own). Surely a
> bit of code-optimization work can fix that.
>
Hum, interesting. What would be the boatload of disadvantages? Is there
any reference to those?
Do you have any idea why doing more processing (Base64 encoding/decoding)
leads to significant better performance? :)
Cheers
Andrea
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Status-of-binary-protocol-usage--tf3972236.html#a11276153
Sent from the PostgreSQL - jdbc mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Russell Francis | 2007-06-24 16:52:04 | Patch to improve Cloneable implementation on classes which extend PGobject. |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-06-24 15:40:52 | Re: Status of binary protocol usage? |