Re: pg_dump -Fd and compression level

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Marc Mamin <M(dot)Mamin(at)intershop(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: "'michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com'" <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pg_dump -Fd and compression level
Date: 2015-07-24 18:42:59
Message-ID: 55B28733.8050003@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 07/24/2015 02:52 AM, Marc Mamin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> After our last upgrade, we've noticed a 10-20% size increase of our dump size.
> This comes from our backup scripts were pg_dump was called without setting -Z
>
> So it seems, that this fix did modify the default compression to use:
> http://michael.otacoo.com/postgresql-2/pg_dump-directory-format-compression/
>
> not sure if this is expected or if this commit accidently changed the default compression, setting it too low.
>
> moreover, the doc is somewhat unclear here as it mentions all formats but the directory one:
>
> -Z 0..9
> --compress=0..9
>
> Specify the compression level to use. Zero means no compression.
> For the custom archive format, this specifies compression of individual
> table-data segments, and the default is to compress at a moderate level.
> For plain text output, setting a nonzero compression level causes the entire
> output file to be compressed, as though it had been fed through gzip;
> but the default is not to compress.
> The tar archive format currently does not support compression at all.
>
> shouldn't that be changed to
>
> - For the custom archive format
> + For the directory and custom archive formats
>
>

What did you upgrade from/to?

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2015-07-24 18:55:20 Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2015-07-24 18:27:28 Re: Supporting TAP tests with MSVC and Windows