Re: storing binary data

From: Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org>
To: PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: storing binary data
Date: 2000-10-17 12:18:27
Message-ID: 20001017081827.A3559@klamath.dyndns.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 11:57:36PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org> writes:
> > It is, but (IMHO) it's a big waste of space. The actual MD5 digest is
> > 128 bits. If stored in binary form, it's 16 bytes. If stored in hex
> > form (as ASCII), it's 32 characters @ 1 byte per character =3D 32 bytes.
>
> You're worried about 16 bytes per pg_shadow entry? Get real. I'd
> have recommended bytea if the amount of storage involved were actually
> significant, but for this application readability seems more important.

To clarify, these are 'application users', not Postgres users. So
the info is stored in one of my own tables, not pg_shadow. Although
I agree, this isn't a big deal either way.

Alfred: thanks for the tip. Looks like base64 will solve my problems!

Thanks to everyone who responded,

Neil

--
Neil Conway <neilconway(at)home(dot)com>
Get my GnuPG key from: http://klamath.dyndns.org/mykey.asc
Encrypted mail welcomed

Violence is to dictatorship as propaganda is to democracy.
-- Noam Chomsky

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message KuroiNeko 2000-10-17 12:38:49 Re: Limit on number of queries from CGI or PHP (security)
Previous Message Abe Asghar 2000-10-17 12:07:52 Deep Trouble