Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 21 April 2016 at 14:19, Shay Rojansky <r...@roji.org> wrote: >> There are potentially huge bandwidth savings which could benefit both WAN >> and non-WAN scenarios, and decoupling this problem from TLS would make it >> both accessible to everyone (assuming PostgreSQL clients follow). It would >> be a protocol change though.
> The problem there is that suddenly everyone wants to get their desired > protocol features in, since we're changing things anyway, and "enabling > protocol compression" becomes ... rather more. > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo#Wire_Protocol_Changes Yeah. I think this should definitely be in the list of things we want to add when we do the fabled 4.0 protocol revision (and, indeed, it's been in the above-cited list for awhile). Whether we've yet gotten to the point of having critical mass for a revision ... meh, I doubt it. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers