1: I think this is irrelevant. 2: this is a fact, but with base64 you have 4 bytes each 3, better that json encoding. btw, PGP compress by default, and base64 is cleantext (more compress ratio). I think you should test it. 3: Idem 2. El 21/10/2014 19:09, "Maria Mary Jane" <[email protected]> escribió:
> This is the real problem by the way: > > 1. We loss CPU and time at JSON or base64 step > 2. We loss CPU and time with crypting 3 times bigger string (real much of > CPU and time) > 3. We loosing traffic and time at the tranferring level. > > Isn't those enought for optimizing that? > > > > > 2014-10-21 16:39 GMT-03:00 Fernando Schuindt <[email protected]>: > I don't know whats happening with your email list, but your message don't > have subject. > Talking about your question, did you tried to convert the buffer objects > to json and them encrypt them once it's became a string? > > var buffer = new ArrayBuffer(12); > var string = JSON.stringify(buffer); // It's a string now. > > I thinks it isn't a good idea... > If you need encrypt something to use internally, you can use base64 (for > example). > But if you need it compatible with the rest of world's software, it wont > work. > > > > -- > Exos ~ (>‿◠)✌ > Linked'in: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ogexos > Twitter: @exos, Indeti.ca: @exos > Cel: [+54 9 11] 6133-2442 > > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- > Version: 3.1 > GCS/IT d-- s++:* a- C+++$ UBL+++$ P(-) L+++$ !E--- W+++$ !N !o K-? !w--- > !O !M-- V? PS+++@ !PE Y+(++) PGP++ !t--- !5 X++ R(+) tv--(!) b- DI D-- G > e@ h>++ r--- y*>+++++ > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > > > > > > *-- С уважением, Maria * > mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]> > > _______________________________________________ > > http://openpgpjs.org > Subscribe/unsubscribe: http://list.openpgpjs.org >
_______________________________________________ http://openpgpjs.org Subscribe/unsubscribe: http://list.openpgpjs.org
