Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: generic WAL compression

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Oleg Ivanov <o(dot)ivanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: generic WAL compression
Date: 2018-01-22 21:37:52
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


I'm not really sure why this is still in Needs Review as a review was
posted and I don't see any follow-up. I've changed this to be Waiting
for Author.

* Antonin Houska (ah(at)cybertec(dot)at) wrote:
> Oleg Ivanov <o(dot)ivanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> > In order to overcome that issue, I would like to propose the patch, which
> > provides possibility to use another approach of the WAL record
> > construction.
> After having spent several hours reviewing this patch I dare to send the
> following comments:

Thanks for the review Antonin!

> * writeToPtr() and readFromPtr() are applied to the existing code. I think
> this is a reason for a separate diff, to be applied before the actual patch.

I'm not really a fan of using these, for my 2c. I'm not sure how others
feel, but having these macros which change one of the arguments to the
macro (by advancing the pointer) doesn't result in a net improvement to
readability for me.

The other review comments also seem pretty reasonable to me.



In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-01-22 21:56:07 Re: pgsql: Move handling of database properties from pg_dumpall into pg_dum
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2018-01-22 21:25:30 Re: [HACKERS] log_destination=file