22 messages in org.postgresql.pgsql-jdbcRe: Binary tx format for an array?
FromSent OnAttachments
Michael GuyverJun 21, 2006 10:26 am 
Dave CramerJun 21, 2006 12:55 pm 
Mark LewisJun 21, 2006 1:31 pm 
Tom LaneJun 21, 2006 3:40 pm 
Michael GuyverJun 22, 2006 1:16 am 
Tom LaneJun 22, 2006 9:54 am 
Mark LewisJun 22, 2006 12:15 pm 
Michael GuyverJun 23, 2006 1:22 am 
Dave CramerJun 23, 2006 4:43 am 
Markus SchaberJun 23, 2006 4:59 am 
Michael GuyverJun 23, 2006 5:46 am 
Dave CramerJun 23, 2006 5:56 am 
Dave CramerJun 23, 2006 6:16 am 
Tom LaneJun 23, 2006 9:18 am 
Mark LewisJun 23, 2006 1:31 pm 
Dave CramerJun 23, 2006 1:39 pm 
Kris JurkaJun 23, 2006 1:46 pm 
Mark LewisJun 23, 2006 1:59 pm 
Marc HerbertJul 10, 2006 2:19 am 
Mark LewisJul 10, 2006 9:18 am 
Marc HerbertJul 10, 2006 10:53 am 
Mark LewisJul 10, 2006 11:59 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:Re: Binary tx format for an array?Actions...
From:Markus Schaber (sch@logix-tt.com)
Date:Jun 23, 2006 4:59:38 am
List:org.postgresql.pgsql-jdbc

Hi, Dave,

Dave Cramer wrote:

I'm curious. Are you attempting to implement the binary protocol for the jdbc driver ?

If so, how are you dealing with date types which are either 64 bit or floating point.

Have you done any testing to see if it is actually faster ?

There's certainly no question with timestamp/date parsing, others may be questionable .

At least for PostGIS (which uses a hexed representation for text protocol currently), I expect the data volume to be exactly 50% for binary.

Bytea and blobs may be similar.

Markus

-- Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS

Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org