Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On tor, 2011-05-26 at 16:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But if you want to take such an extension into account right now,
>> maybe we ought to design that feature now. What are you seeing it as
>> looking like?
>>
>> My thought is that "-z" should just mean "give me comp
On tor, 2011-05-26 at 16:54 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> But if you want to take such an extension into account right now,
> maybe we ought to design that feature now. What are you seeing it as
> looking like?
>
> My thought is that "-z" should just mean "give me compression; a good
> default compres
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> On tis, 2011-05-24 at 15:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I would argue that -Z ought to turn on "gzip" without my having to write
>> -z as well (at least when the argument is greater than zero; possibly
>> -Z0 should be allowed as meaning "no compression").
> My concern w
On tis, 2011-05-24 at 15:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I would argue that -Z ought to turn on "gzip" without my having to
> write
> -z as well (at least when the argument is greater than zero; possibly
> -Z0 should be allowed as meaning "no compression").
My concern with that is that if we ever add
Peter Eisentraut writes:
> Quick patch for verification. I chose the naming -z/--gzip to mirror
> GNU tar.
I would argue that -Z ought to turn on "gzip" without my having to write
-z as well (at least when the argument is greater than zero; possibly
-Z0 should be allowed as meaning "no compressi
On sön, 2011-05-22 at 16:43 -0400, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 17:45, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On fre, 2011-05-20 at 14:19 -0400, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> > I suggest we add an argument-less option -z that means "compress",
> >> and
> >> > then -Z can be relegated to cho
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 17:45, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On fre, 2011-05-20 at 14:19 -0400, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> > I suggest we add an argument-less option -z that means "compress",
>> and
>> > then -Z can be relegated to choosing the compression level.
>>
>> We can't just use -Z without a pa
On fre, 2011-05-20 at 14:19 -0400, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > I suggest we add an argument-less option -z that means "compress",
> and
> > then -Z can be relegated to choosing the compression level.
>
> We can't just use -Z without a parameter for that?
You can't portably have a command-line opt
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 17:56, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> There is no way to tell pg_basebackup to "just compress the thing in a
> default way". You have to pick some number and then write -Z8 or
> something. I suppose that interface was copied from pg_dump, but there
> it's not that commonly use
There is no way to tell pg_basebackup to "just compress the thing in a
default way". You have to pick some number and then write -Z8 or
something. I suppose that interface was copied from pg_dump, but there
it's not that commonly used because the right formats are compressed by
default.
I sugges
10 matches
Mail list logo
