On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 2014-09-11 13:04:43 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> > On 2014-09-11 12:55:21 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> >> I advise supporting pglz only for the initial patch, and adding
>> >> support for the others later if it seems worthwhile. The approach
>> >> seems to work well enough with pglz that it's worth doing even if we
>> >> never add the other algorithms.
>> >
>> > That approach is fine with me. Note though that I am pretty strongly
>> > against adding support for more than one algorithm at the same time.
>>
>> What if one algorithm compresses better and the other algorithm uses
>> less CPU time?
>
> Then we make a choice for our users. A configuration option about an
> aspect of postgres that darned view people will understand with for the
> marginal differences between snappy and lz4 doesn't make sense.
Maybe. Let's get the basic patch done first; then we can argue about that.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
