From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, 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 12:02:13 |
Message-ID: | 4A017C45.4020009@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Merlin Moncure wrote:
> 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.
>
er, no, not as I read rfc 3548 s 2.1.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dawid Kuroczko | 2009-05-06 13:04:50 | Re: create if not exists (CINE) |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2009-05-06 11:51:14 | Re: bytea vs. pg_dump |