> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 8:48 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I agree with the critiques from Robbie Harwood and Michael Paquier
> that the way in that compression is being hooked into the existing
> architecture looks like a kludge. I'm not sure I know exactly how it
> should be done, but the current approach doesn't look natural; it
> looks like it was bolted on.
After some time spend reading this patch and investigating different points,
mentioned in the discussion, I tend to agree with that. As far as I see it's
probably the biggest disagreement here, that keeps things from progressing. I'm
interested in this feature, so if Konstantin doesn't mind, I'll post in the
near future (after I'll wrap up the current CF) an updated patch I'm working on
right now to propose another way of incorporating compression. For now I'm
moving patch to the next CF.
