| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Georgios Kokolatos <gkokolatos(at)pm(dot)me>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeevan Ladhe <jeevan(dot)ladhe(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Refactoring of compression options in pg_basebackup |
| Date: | 2022-01-17 14:14:05 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoY1-Br4M9oAudhk2yzKEA8Ju7pidf8PWrmgRySO9E7zRw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 9:54 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> Okay. So, based on this feedback, I guess that something like the
> attached would be what we are looking for. I have maximized the
> amount of code removed with the removal of -z/-Z, but I won't fight
> hard if the consensus is to keep them, either. We could also keep
> -z/--gzip, and stick -Z to the new --compression-level with
> --compress removed.
I mean, I really don't understand the benefit of removing -z and -Z.
-z can remain a synonym for --client-compress=gzip and -Z for
--client-compress=gzip --compression-level=$N and nobody will be
harmed. Taking them out reduces backward compatibility for no gain
that I can see.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-01-17 14:18:31 | Re: Refactoring of compression options in pg_basebackup |
| Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2022-01-17 14:09:11 | Re: Support for NSS as a libpq TLS backend |