Doug McNaught <doug(at)wireboard(dot)com> writes:
> I think the big obstacle to putting compression into PG is needing to
> extend the FE/BE protocol for negotiating compression, and the possible
> client compatibility issues that raises. We already have SSL
> negotiation working, though...
Yup. Seems like a more useful exercise would be to lobby the SSL people
to include compression as an option in SSL connections. That would
solve the problem not only for PG, but every other application that uses
SSL ...
regards, tom lane