On Jun25, 2012, at 21:21 , Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: >> Or that it takes less code/generates cleaner code... > > So we're talking about some LZO things such as snappy from google, and > that would be another run time dependency IIUC. > > I think it's time to talk about fastlz: > > http://fastlz.org/ > http://code.google.com/p/fastlz/source/browse/trunk/fastlz.c > > 551 lines of C code under MIT license, works also under windows > > I guess it would be easy (and safe) enough to embed in our tree should > we decide going this way.
Agreed. If we extend the protocol to support compression, and not rely on SSL, then let's pick one of these LZ77-style compressors, and let's integrate it into our tree. We should then also make it possible to enable compression only for the server -> client direction. Since those types of compressions are usually pretty easy to decompress, that reduces the amount to work non-libpq clients have to put in to take advantage of compression. 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
