Re: Feature Request: bzip2 support in pg_dump, pg_restore

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Daniel Migowski <dmigowski(at)ikoffice(dot)de>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Feature Request: bzip2 support in pg_dump, pg_restore
Date: 2010-08-13 14:47:30
Message-ID: 23875.1281710850@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Daniel Migowski wrote:
>> A small investigation showed to me that bzip2 compressed sql files
>> take only 60% of the space of gz compressed files. Since bzip2 is
>> fairly common today, could one add an option to pg_dump and pg_restore
>> supporting this compression type in their custom format? Or do the
>> PostgreSQL folks prefer no to do that regarding backwards compatibility?

> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Developer_FAQ#Why_aren.27t_there_more_compression_options_when_dumping_tables.3F
> now has a first round answer to this topic, one that addresses the
> things that pop up every time this discussion is raised. There are
> speed, code quality, code license, and patent issues all making this
> much harder to change than is obvious at first.

Looks good. I added the point that pg_dump output has to be readable
far into the future, so conservatism in what we support is a good thing.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2010-08-13 14:50:41 Re: Compression on SSL links?
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2010-08-13 14:43:16 Re: Compression on SSL links?