Re: PostgreSQL gaps wrt to java, and jdbc

On 7 July 2015 at 16:56, Kevin Wooten <kdubb(at)me(dot)com> wrote:

>
> On Jul 7, 2015, at 1:49 PM, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 7 July 2015 at 16:46, Markus KARG <markus(at)headcrashing(dot)eu> wrote:
>
>> No, unfortunately not, as there is a big difference between compression
>> and binary transmission. See the following example:
>>
>>
>>
>> <Some-Element xyz="345678,901">
>>
>> <Some-Other-Element abc="54321,876">
>>
>> <Some-Value my-attribute="123456,789"/>
>>
>> </Some-Other-Element>
>>
>> </Some-Element>
>>
>>
>>
>> With compression, you can certainly get rid of the whitespace, and if the
>> compression algorithms is better you even will have refs instead of element
>> names, but that's it, mostly. What about the numbers? Still transfered
>> untouched, as unique hence uncompressable. So lots of integers and decimals
>> screws compression.
>>
>>
>>
>> Binary transmission on the other hand will only need four bytes per
>> integer. That makes twelve bytes for all the above attributes.
>>
>
> You would require oids (or some other way to decode) for numbers, boolean,
> strings, etc for each binary representation, no ?
>
>
> Dave Cramer
>
> dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
> http://www.credativ.ca
>
>
>
> My assumption has been that the true binary format is something dictated
> by Javascript engine (I assume it would be V8 since Pl/V8 exists). So it
> seems we could just glean it from there and need no other transmitted
> information besides that “standard”.
>

Not having followed JS too closely are there other binary formats besides
V8 ?

Dave Cramer

dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca