Re: pg_dump -Fd and compression level

From: Marc Mamin <M(dot)Mamin(at)intershop(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "'michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com'" <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: pg_dump -Fd and compression level
Date: 2015-07-25 06:34:46
Message-ID: B6F6FD62F2624C4C9916AC0175D56D8828C18102@jenmbs01.ad.intershop.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> Hmm. Yeah. It looks like commit a7ad5cf0cfcfab8418000d652fa4f0c6ad6c8911
>> changed from using the default compression for libz to using the
>> compression set in pg_dump options, which defaults to 0. This actually
>> seems like the right thing to do, but it certainly should have been
>> called out much more forcefully in release notes, and arguably should
>> not have been changed in stable releases. Not sure what we do about it now.

really 0? wouldn't that mean no compression at all?

>I don't think we realized that we were changing the default behavior.
>Still, it's clearly a bug fix, so I'm disinclined to revert it now.
>
> regards, tom lane

Sure, but at least the doc should be modified as it suggests that a higher compression is used:

"the default is to compress at a moderate level"
=>
"the default is to compress at the lowest level"

And maybe a quick notice for planet Postgres to highlight the modification of the default behavior.
(I' haven't a blog myself ...)

IMHO a slightly higher default would help spare some hardware out there...

regards,
Marc Mamin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Charles Clavadetscher 2015-07-25 07:01:14 Re: Speakers Wanted for pgDay Cuba
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2015-07-25 06:22:07 Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.