Re: Fixes for compression options of pg_receivewal and refactoring of backup_compression.{c,h}
От | gkokolatos@pm.me |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Fixes for compression options of pg_receivewal and refactoring of backup_compression.{c,h} |
Дата | |
Msg-id | QYtEfeZ2bTdYAeqCR-5rQs_myRhJclxaVfun-OEVSPnauawRqris5UNUTnYtoFy_KnhCbsjtkEeoxvZgLT0UkZTMnMq65BOwklSwFqbvI1U=@pm.me обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Fixes for compression options of pg_receivewal and refactoring of backup_compression.{c,h} (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Fixes for compression options of pg_receivewal and refactoring of backup_compression.{c,h}
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
------- Original Message ------- On Wednesday, April 13th, 2022 at 7:25 AM, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 06:22:48PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 12:46:02PM +0000, gkokolatos@pm.me wrote: > > > > > It looks good. If you choose to discard the comment regarding the use of > > > 'method' over 'algorithm' from above, can you please use the full word in the > > > variable, e.g. 'wal_compress_algorithm' instead of 'wal_compress_algo'. I can > > > not really explain it, the later reads a bit rude. Then again that may be just > > > me. > > > > Thanks. I have been able to do an extra pass on 0001 and 0002, fixing > > those naming inconsistencies with "algo" vs "algorithm" that you and > > Robert have reported, and applied them. For 0003, I'll look at it > > later. Attached is a rebase with improvements about the variable > > names. > > This has been done with the proper renames. With that in place, I see > no reason now to not be able to set the compression level as it is > possible to pass it down with the options available. This requires > only a couple of lines, as of the attached. LZ4 has a dummy structure > called LZ4F_INIT_PREFERENCES to initialize LZ4F_preferences_t, that > holds the compression level before passing it down to > LZ4F_compressBegin(), but that's available only in v1.8.3. Using it > risks lowering down the minimal version of LZ4 we are able to use now, > but replacing that with a set of memset()s is also a way to set up > things as per its documentation. > > Thoughts? It's really not hard to add compression level. However we had briefly discussed it in the original thread [1] and decided against. That is why I did not write that code. If the community thinks differently now, let me know if you would like me to offer a patch for it. Cheers, //Georgios [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CABUevEwuq7XXyd4fA0W3jY9MsJu9B2WRbHumAA%2B3WzHrGAQjsg%40mail.gmail.com#b6456fa2adc1cdb049a57bf3587666b9
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: