Re: bytea vs. pg_dump

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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