On 4 November 2015 at 20:48, Bill Moran <wmo...@potentialtech.com> wrote:
> On a related note, since I've been digging in this area of code I feel > comfortable commenting that pluggable compression isn't terribly difficult > to implement. The most significant work will probably be in actually > implementing the various algorithms, not in making them pluggable. I've > been considering making that my next project. IIRC the biggest roadblocks for pluggable compression were around binary upgrade and around the per-Datum or per-tuple space cost of identifying which algorithm is used. But I guess that's getting off-track. > Overall, I don't feel like you're actually disagreeing with > anything I'm doing ... you're just wishing I was already further > along. Indeed. I'm concerned about the extra complexity exposed to users and unsure about GUCs as an interface, but I can see being able to encourage earlier and more aggressive compression as potentially quite handy. -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
