Re: Faster compression, again

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Daniel Farina" <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>,"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Faster compression, again
Date: 2012-03-14 22:08:01
Message-ID: 4F60D07102000025000462C9@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Another not-exactly-trivial requirement is to figure out how to
> not break on-disk compatibility when installing an alternative
> compression scheme. In hindsight it might've been a good idea if
> pglz_compress had wasted a little bit of space on some sort of
> version identifier ... but it didn't.

Doesn't it always start with a header of two int32 values where the
first must be smaller than the second? That seems like enough to
get traction for an identifiably different header for an alternative
compression technique.

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Noah Misch 2012-03-14 22:10:00 Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-03-14 21:58:42 Re: Faster compression, again