Re: Wire protocol compression - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Wire protocol compression
Date
Msg-id 32241.1461247648@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Wire protocol compression  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Wire protocol compression  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 21 April 2016 at 14:19, Shay Rojansky <roji@roji.org> wrote:
>> There are potentially huge bandwidth savings which could benefit both WAN
>> and non-WAN scenarios, and decoupling this problem from TLS would make it
>> both accessible to everyone (assuming PostgreSQL clients follow). It would
>> be a protocol change though.

> The problem there is that suddenly everyone wants to get their desired
> protocol features in, since we're changing things anyway, and "enabling
> protocol compression" becomes ... rather more.
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo#Wire_Protocol_Changes

Yeah.  I think this should definitely be in the list of things we want
to add when we do the fabled 4.0 protocol revision (and, indeed, it's
been in the above-cited list for awhile).  Whether we've yet gotten to
the point of having critical mass for a revision ... meh, I doubt it.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kevin Grittner
Date:
Subject: Re: snapshot too old, configured by time
Next
From: Kevin Grittner
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold <