Andrew Gierth wrote:
> The code already has users who are using it for audit-trail stuff
> (easily computing the changes between old and new records and storing
> only the differences). Perhaps one of the existing users could express
> an opinion on this point.
>
>
>
I use it for exactly that purpose (and it works extremely well). I'm not
sure we have any values > 64k, though, and certainly our keys are tiny -
they are all column names. OTOH, that could well be an annoying
limitation, and would be easily breached if the changed field were some
binary object like an image or a PDF.
I rather like your idea of doing a convert-on-write, if you can reliably
detect that the data is in the old or new format.
cheers
andrew
