On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 02:58:28PM +0000, gkokola...@pm.me wrote: > It's really not hard to add compression level. However we had briefly > discussed it in the original thread [1] and decided against. That is why > I did not write that code. If the community thinks differently now, let > me know if you would like me to offer a patch for it.
The issue back then was how to design the option set to handle all that (right? My memories may be short on that), and pg_basebackup takes care of that with its option design. This is roughly what has been done here, except that this was for the contentSize: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/rYyZ3Fj9qayyY9-egNsV_kkLbL_BSWcOEdi3Mb6M9eQRTkcA2jrqFEHglLUEYnzWR_wttCqn7VI94MZ2p7mwNje51lHTvWYnJ1jHdOceen4=@pm.me Do you think that the extra test coverage is going to be too much of a burden? I was thinking about just adding a level to the main lz4 command, with an extra negative test in the SKIP block with a level out of range -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
