| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: bytea_output output of base64 |
| Date: | 2017-02-25 23:49:01 |
| Message-ID: | ebf0ed5e-67c0-4f63-3407-5b4592e0f7c3@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/23/17 17:55, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 04:08:58PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>>> Is there a reason we don't support base64 as a bytea_output output
>>> option, except that no one has implemented it?
>>
>> How about "we already have one too many bytea output formats"?
>> I don't think forcing code to try to support still another one
>> is a great thing ... especially not if it couldn't be reliably
>> distinguished from the hex format.
>
> Is there a reason we chose hex over base64?
The reason we changed from the old format to hex was for performance.
We didn't consider base64 at the time, but hex would probably still have
been faster.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2017-02-25 23:59:30 | Re: bytea_output output of base64 |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-02-25 23:24:04 | Re: Automatic cleanup of oldest WAL segments with pg_receivexlog |