The converting back was just a nice to have so I could validate things like a unit test. I'll look into hashing though.
Thanks Tom On Tue, 14 Mar 2023 at 10:17, Greg Keogh via ozdotnet <ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com> wrote: > Hi Tom, I think this is a maths problem more than a SQL one. Good fun! > > At first I thought "just MD5 hash the original string to 16 bytes and > store the 32 hex chars". > > Then you said you'd like to convert back, which sank my idea. The only > option left is compression, but I'll bet it would be a miracle if all of > your original strings could be roundtripped via 32 compressed characters. > > *Greg K* > -- > ozdotnet mailing list > To manage your subscription, access archives: https://codify.mailman3.com/
