On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Florian Pflug <f...@phlo.org> wrote: > On Jun14, 2012, at 15:28 , Euler Taveira wrote: >> On 14-06-2012 02:19, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I still think that pushing this off to openssl (not an ssh tunnel, but >>> the underlying transport library) would be an adequate solution. >>> If you are shoving data over a connection that is long enough to need >>> compression, the odds that every bit of it is trustworthy seem pretty >>> small, so you need encryption too. >>> >> I don't want to pay the SSL connection overhead. Also I just want >> compression, >> encryption is not required. OpenSSL give us encryption with/without >> compression; we need an option to obtain compression in non-SSL connections. > > AFAIR, openssl supports a NULL cipher which doesn't do any encryption. We > could have a connection parameter, say compress=on, which selects that > cipher (unless sslmode is set to prefer or higher, of course). > > SSL NULL-chipher connections would be treated like unencrypted connections > when matching against pg_hba.conf. > > best regards, > Florian Pflug > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
It doesn't sound like there is a lot of support for this idea, but I think it would be nice to get something like lz4 (http://code.google.com/p/lz4/) or snappy (http://code.google.com/p/snappy/) support. Both are BSD-ish licensed. It could be useful for streaming replication as well. A hook (as Euler mentioned) might be a nice compromise. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
