Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> But...it seems kind of hacky to scan it again for owners and privs - are
> you sure you want me to go that way?
If there's not a big performance penalty, sure. Being fully compatible
with existing archive files is a sufficient win to justify sins much
worse than this one.
regards, tom lane