On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@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.
another nit with base64 is that properly encoded data requires newlines according to the standard. merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
