Kevin Grittner wrote:
> I omitted the code I was originally considering to have it work against
> files "in place" rather than as a filter. It seemed much simpler this
> way, we didn't actually have a use case for the additional functionality,
> and it seemed safer as a filter. Thoughts?
A special "non-filter" mode could save some IO and diskspace by not actually
writing all those zeros, but instead just seek to SizeOfWal-1 after writing the
last valid byte, and writing one more zero. Of course, if you're gonna
compress the WAL anyway, there is no point...
greetings, Florian Pflug
