Re: Is a plan for lmza commpression in pg_dump

From: Grzegorz Jaskiewicz <gj(at)pointblue(dot)com(dot)pl>
To: daveg <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>, Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>, Stanislav Lacko <lacko(at)spacesystems(dot)sk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Is a plan for lmza commpression in pg_dump
Date: 2009-02-07 21:11:24
Message-ID: 12A64754-1C70-4C97-A068-7CED0E6A24ED@pointblue.com.pl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 7 Feb 2009, at 21:08, daveg wrote:
>>
>
> That this comes up "much to often" suggests that there is more than
> near
> zero interest. Why can only one compression library can be
> considered?
> We use multiple readline implementations, for better or worse.

I don't see anything wrong with using standard unix pipes... and do it
in truly unix and scalable way !

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David E. Wheeler 2009-02-07 21:35:07 Re: LIMIT NULL
Previous Message daveg 2009-02-07 21:08:48 Re: Is a plan for lmza commpression in pg_dump