I've been following this issue these last few months. Having the latest and best compressors built-in is a fashionable features these days. And for good reasons.
I'm quite amazed that this issue is still considered a "legal risk". To put this in perspective, the *whole world* is using LZ4 by now. It's integrated directly into Linux kernel ARM, which means every smartphone on the planet will have this piece of software integrated right at the factory. And that's not just Linux. HBase has it. TokuDB has it. Delphix has it. And PostgreSQL is stuck with what, pglz ? How come any compressor which could put some competition to pglz is systematically pushed out of the field on the ground of unverifiable "legal risks" ? And why would pglz be much safer to the very same risks ? From what I can see, pglz is more complex, and therefore exposed to many more patent risks, than simpler lz alternatives. Seems the debate is overly biaised in favor of pglz. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/pluggable-compression-support-tp5759259p5772891.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - hackers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
