On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 10:19:47AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > Yeah, I am tempted to just add LZ4 as a first step as the patch > footprint would be minimal, and we could come back to zstd once we > have more feedback from the field, if that's necessary. As said > upthread, we have more flexibility with WAL than for the relation > data.
I have worked more on that today and finished with two patches: - 0001 is the mininal patch to add support for LZ4. This is in a rather committable shape. I noticed that we checked for an incorrect error code in the compression and decompression paths as LZ4 APIs can return a negative result. There were also some extra bugs I spotted. Its size is satisfying for what it does, and there is MSVC support out-of-the-box: 12 files changed, 176 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-) - 0002 is the extra code need to add ZSTD and do the same. This still requires support for MSVC and I have not checked the internals of ZSTD to see if we do the compress/decompress calls the right way. While on it, I am going to switch my buildfarm animal to use LZ4 for toast.. Just saying. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
