On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 07:27:50AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 08:39:59AM +0000, gkokolatos@pm.me wrote: > > Agreed. > > > > I have already started on v8 of the patch with that technique. I should > > be able to update the thread soon. > > Nice, thanks!
By the way, I was reading the last version of the patch today, and it seems to me that we could make the commit history if we split the patch into two parts: - One that introduces the new option --compression-method and is_xlogfilename(), while reworking --compress (including documentation changes). - One to have LZ4 support.
v7 has been using "gzip" for the option name, but I think that it would be more consistent to use "zlib" instead.
Um, why?
That we are using zlib to provide the compression is an implementation detail. Whereas AFAIK "gzip" refers to both the program and the format. And we specifically use the gzxxx() functions in zlib, in order to produce gzip format.
I think for the end user, it is strictly better to name it "gzip", and given that the target of this option is the end user we should do so. (It'd be different it we were talking about a build-time parameter to configure).
