Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From gkokolatos@pm.me
Subject Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump
Date
Msg-id O4mutIrCES8ZhlXJiMvzsivT7ztAMja2lkdL1LJx6O5f22I2W8PBIeLKz7mDLwxHoibcnRAYJXm1pH4tyUNC4a8eDzLn22a6Pb1S74Niexg=@pm.me
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: Add LZ4 compression in pg_dump
List pgsql-hackers




------- Original Message -------
On Tuesday, November 22nd, 2022 at 11:49 AM, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:


>
>
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 10:00:47AM +0000, gkokolatos@pm.me wrote:
>
> > A new version that I feel that is in a decent enough state for review should
> > be ready within this week. I am happy to drop the patch if you think I should
> > not work on it though.
>
>
> If you can post a new version of the patch, that's fine, of course.
> I'll be happy to look over it more.

Thank you Michael (and Justin). Allow me to present v8.

The focus of this version of this series is 0001 and 0002.

Admittedly 0001 could be presented in a separate thread though given its size and
proximity to the topic, I present it here.

In an earlier review you spotted the similarity between pg_dump's and pg_receivewal's
parsing of compression options. However there exists a substantial difference in the
behaviour of the two programs; one treats the lack of support for the requested
algorithm as a fatal error, whereas the other does not. The existing functions in
common/compression.c do not account for the later. 0002 proposes an implementation
for this. It's usefulness is shown in 0003.

Please consider 0003-0005 as work in progress. They are differences from v7 yet they
may contain unaddressed comments for now.

A welcome feedback would be in splitting and/or reordering of 0003-0005. I think
that they now split in coherent units and are presented in a logical order. Let me
know if you disagree and where should the breakpoints be.

Cheers,
//Georgios

> --
> Michael
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Removing another gen_node_support.pl special case
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Removing another gen_node_support.pl special case