On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:17 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > I think we should take a few steps back and ask why we think that > binary encoding is the way to go. We store XML as text, for example, > and I can't remember any complaints about that on -bugs or > -performance, so why do we think JSON will be different? Binary > encoding is a trade-off. A well-designed binary encoding should make > it quicker to extract a small chunk of a large JSON object and return > it; however, it will also make it slower to return the whole object > (because you're adding serialization overhead). I haven't seen any > analysis of which of those use cases is more important and why.
Maybe someone has numbers on that for the XML type? Best, David -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
