Re: [Maria-developers] WL#240 New (by Mdcallag): client-side compressed types

2011-09-30 Thread Jakob Lorberblatt
> One question to this: Why not simply use 'compressed protocol' for the > connection? Alright, the question below is regarding A) binlog size and B) transaction log size as well as bandwidth, the compressed client protocol does not address either issue, but does make accessing the data transparent

Re: [Maria-developers] WL#240 New (by Mdcallag): client-side compressed types

2011-09-30 Thread Peter Laursen
One question to this: Why not simply use 'compressed protocol' for the connection? Peter Webyog On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 22:31, wrote: > --- > WORKLOG TASK > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [Maria-developers] WL#240 New (by Mdcallag): client-side compressed types

2011-09-30 Thread Peter Laursen
One question: why not use 'compressed protocol' then? Peter Webyog On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 22:31, wrote: > --- > WORKLOG TASK > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[Maria-developers] WL#240 New (by Mdcallag): client-side compressed types

2011-09-30 Thread worklog-noreply
--- WORKLOG TASK -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- TASK...: client-side compressed types CREATION DATE..: Fri, 30 Sep 2011, 20:31 SUPERVISOR.: IMPLEME