On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 6:23 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff.ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Since SSL compression seems to be a busted flush, I would like to see
> pg_basebackup be able to do compression on the server end, not just
> the client end, in order to spare network bandwidth.
> Any comments on how hard this would be, or why we don't want it?
I think we want it at protocol level rather than pg_basebackup level. If
SSL compression is busted on base backups, it's equally busted on regular
connection and replication streams. People do ask for compression on that
(in particular I've had a lot of requests when it comes to replication),
and our response there has traditionally been "ssl compression"...