* Bruce Momjian (bruce(at)momjian(dot)us) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:55:04AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Peter Eisentraut (peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net) wrote:
> > > Operating on compressed files transparently in file_fdw is obviously
> > > useful, but why only gzip?
> > This isn't really an argument, imv. It's only gzip *right this moment*
> > because that's all that I implemented. I've already offered to add
> > bzip2 or whatever else people would like.
> And this leads to support-my-compression-binary-of-the-day mess. Why
> not just allow them to do '|compression-binary'?
You're right, to clarify, for *file_fdw*, which is a backend-only
operation, the popen patch is great (thought I made that clear before).
The popen patch doesn't support the '|compression-binary' option through
the FE protocol. Even if it did, it would only be available for
superusers as we can't allow regular users to run arbitrary commands on
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2013-01-15 19:55:34|
|Subject: Re: Get current query in a trigger function|
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2013-01-15 19:51:54|
|Subject: Re: Save The Date: Cluster-Hackers meeting