From: | Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Mateusz Łoskot <mateusz(at)loskot(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PQexecParams with binary resultFormat vs BINARY CURSOR |
Date: | 2011-11-11 09:57:59 |
Message-ID: | CAAfz9KNW2CtCHOOHcZvq2HUMXsLfjAe=fiaPB=vmjtYYAEXLGA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hey Mateusz,
2011/11/11 Mateusz Łoskot <mateusz(at)loskot(dot)net>
> Hi,
>
> Considering query for binary data stored directly in tables
> using libpq API, I'm trying to understand what is the difference
> between specifying binary format in functions like
> PQexecParams and use of BINARY CURSOR.
>
> For example, with query like this:
>
> SELECT large_image FROM tbl;
>
> where large_image is a custom type,
> is there a big difference between binary format specified
> to libpq and use of BINARY CURSOR?
> Is it client-side binary vs server-side binary processing?
>
> Simply, I'd like to avoid textual<->binary conversions at any stage.
>
> (Endianness is not an issue here.)
>
> Best regards,
>
"...The concept of a binary cursor as such is thus obsolete when using
extended query protocol — any cursor can be treated as either text or
binary. ..."
from
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/sql-declare.html
--
// Dmitriy.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mateusz Łoskot | 2011-11-11 10:26:26 | Re: PQexecParams with binary resultFormat vs BINARY CURSOR |
Previous Message | Albe Laurenz | 2011-11-11 08:43:34 | Re: strange behavior, hoping for an explanation |