Re: bytea vs. pg_dump - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
Date
Msg-id 26269.1241554494@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to bytea vs. pg_dump  (Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>)
Responses Re: bytea vs. pg_dump  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Re: bytea vs. pg_dump  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.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.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: bytea vs. pg_dump
Next
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: Re: bytea vs. pg_dump