From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: inconvenient compression options in pg_basebackup |
Date: | 2011-05-26 21:04:21 |
Message-ID: | 1306443861.27440.9.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On tor, 2011-05-26 at 16:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> But if you want to take such an extension into account right now,
> maybe we ought to design that feature now. What are you seeing it as
> looking like?
>
> My thought is that "-z" should just mean "give me compression; a good
> default compression setting is fine". "-Zn" could mean "I want gzip
> with exactly this compression level" (thus making the presence or
> absence of -z moot). If you want to specify some other compression
> method altogether, use something like --lzma=N. It seems unlikely to
> me that somebody who wants to override the default compression method
> wouldn't want to pick the settings for it too.
I think of pg_basebackup as analogous to tar. tar has a bunch of
options to set a compression method (-Z, -z, -j, -J), but no support for
setting compression specific options. So in that sense that contradicts
your suspicion.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-05-26 21:06:01 | Re: pg_basebackup compressed tar to stdout |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2011-05-26 21:01:36 | pg_basebackup compressed tar to stdout |