| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Daniil Zakhlystov <usernamedt(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Denis Smirnov <sd(at)arenadata(dot)io>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: libpq compression |
| Date: | 2020-12-22 20:16:58 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobaHKCWzBZK0iD1EUUjpfpy6g_e=h6-xz48ihxeccudaQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 2:33 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I'd assume that there's a direct correlation between the compression level
> setting and the window size; but I've not studied the libzstd docs in
> enough detail to know what it is.
But there is a privilege boundary between the sender and the receiver.
What's alleged here is that the sender can do a thing which causes the
receiver to burn through tons of memory. It doesn't help anything to
say, well, the sender ought to use a window size of N or less. What if
they don't?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-12-22 20:46:27 | Re: libpq compression |
| Previous Message | Alastair Turner | 2020-12-22 20:15:27 | Re: Proposed patch for key managment |