Ron Johnson wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 10/18/06 09:47, Merlin Moncure wrote: > > On 10/18/06, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > I tested binary quite a bit and only found it to be a win if moving > >> > blobs in and out of the database. On 'normal' tables of mixed fields > >> > types of small size, it can actually be slower. Binary is a bit > >> > faster for native types and bytea, and slower for character types. > >> > >> "native types"? > > > > types operated on directly by the processor. int2, int4, int8, float4, > > and float8, and their various aliases :). > > > > in short, i think using binary for anything other than bytea is a > > waste of effort/time, except for bytea. > > That's counter-intuitive, since you'd (well, I'd) think that doing a > binary copy would be faster since the code would bypass the int-to- > ascii conversion.
Yeah, but on the other hand it has to do the htonl/ntohl conversion. (I'd guess that should be faster than the text-to-int anyway ...) -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
