Re: libpq compression - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Nico Williams
Subject Re: libpq compression
Date
Msg-id 20180621213404.GK4200@localhost
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: libpq compression  (Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizhnik@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: libpq compression
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 10:12:17AM +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik wrote:
> On 20.06.2018 23:34, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> >Konstantin Knizhnik <k.knizhnik@postgrespro.ru> writes:
> >Well, that's a design decision you've made.  You could put lengths on
> >chunks that are sent out - then you'd know exactly how much is needed.
> >(For instance, 4 bytes of network-order length followed by a complete
> >payload.)  Then you'd absolutely know whether you have enough to
> >decompress or not.
> 
> Do you really suggest to send extra header for each chunk of data?
> Please notice that chunk can be as small as one message: dozen of bytes
> because libpq is used for client-server communication with request-reply
> pattern.

You must have lengths, yes, otherwise you're saying that the chosen
compression mechanism must itself provide framing.

I'm not that familiar with compression APIs and formats, but looking at
RFC1950 (zlib) for example I see no framing.

So I think you just have to have lengths.

Now, this being about compression, I understand that you might now want
to have 4-byte lengths, especially given that most messages will be
under 8KB.  So use a varint encoding for the lengths.

Nico
-- 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Fast default stuff versus pg_upgrade
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and KeyManagement Service (KMS)