Re: compressed protocol - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: compressed protocol
Date
Msg-id 2590.1157330787@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: compressed protocol  (Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net>)
Responses Re: compressed protocol
List pgsql-general
Ron Johnson <ron.l.johnson@cox.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> zeljko <zeljko@holobit.net> writes:
>>> Is there any plans (or somebody already working on) to see compressed
>>> protocol in 8.2 ?
>>
>> Why bother?  Run your session through an ssh tunnel and ask it to
>> compress.

> Wouldn't that add extra libssl overhead?

Well, (a) if you're sending your data over a nonlocal network (and over
a LAN, you don't need compression), you probably want some encryption.
(b) I believe there's a "null cipher" mode for SSL if you truly don't
need encryption.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Ron Johnson
Date:
Subject: Re: compressed protocol
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Syntax for converting double to a timestamp