Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > I mean, we don't necessarily need to make it configurable if we just add > one canonical new "better" compression format. I am not sure that's > sufficient since I can see usecases for 'very fast but not too well > compressed' and 'very well compressed but slow', but I am personally not > really interested in the second case, so ...
IME, once we've changed it once, the odds that we'll want to change it again go up drastically. I think if we're going to make a change here we should leave room for future revisions. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers