X-Original-To: pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 424B7D1E151 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 12:42:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 57372-03 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:42:05 -0400 (AST) Received: from sh.ukr.net (80-135.odessa.dialup.ukr.net [212.42.80.135]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19B67D1B4DE for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 08:41:58 -0400 (AST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sh.ukr.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ADCA11C40B; Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:42:14 +0200 (EET) From: Igor Shevchenko To: Achilleus Mantzios Subject: Re: bytea or blobs? Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:42:13 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.6 References: In-Reply-To: Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200402201442.13869.igor@carcass.ath.cx> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200402/302 X-Sequence-Number: 16992 On Wednesday 18 February 2004 09:18, you wrote: > Maybe if bandwidth is a restriction the base64 solution > saves some bandwith, since base64 file is ~ 1.3 times larger > than the original, whereas the escaped octal representation > will be ~ 4 times larger. If you use libpq's v3 protocol with binary format (PostgreSQL 7.4+), the overhead is minimal both ways. -- Best regards, Igor Shevchenko