On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 04:53:12PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 10:23 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>> Using --compression-level=NUMBER and --server-compress=METHOD to
>> specify a server-side compression method with a level is fine by me,
>> but I find the reuse of --compress to specify a compression method
>> confusing as it maps with the past option we have kept in
>> pg_basebackup for a couple of years now. Based on your suggested set
>> of options, we could then have a --client-compress=METHOD and
>> --compression-level=NUMBER to specify a client-side compression method
>> with a level. If we do that, I guess that we should then:
>> 1) Block the combination of --server-compress and --client-compress.
>> 2) Remove the existing -Z/--compress and -z/--gzip.
>
> I could live with that. I'm not sure that --client-compress instead of
> reusing --compress is going to be better ... but I don't think it's
> awful so much as just not my first choice. I also don't think it would
> be horrid to leave -z, --gzip, and -Z as shorthands for the
> --client-compress=gzip with --compression-level also in the last case,
> instead of removing all that stuff.
Okay. So, based on this feedback, I guess that something like the
attached would be what we are looking for. I have maximized the
amount of code removed with the removal of -z/-Z, but I won't fight
hard if the consensus is to keep them, either. We could also keep
-z/--gzip, and stick -Z to the new --compression-level with
--compress removed.
--
Michael