* Claudio Freire (klaussfreire@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> > Where it does work well is when you move into a bulk-data mode (ala
> > COPY) and can compress relatively large amounts of data into a smaller
> > number of full-size packets to be sent.
>
> Well... exactly. COPY is one case, big result sets is another.
> And packet headers can include whether each packet is compressed or
> not, which is quite transparent and easy to handle. There could even
> be a negotiation phase and make it backwards-compatible.
COPY and a large result set are the only cases, and a large result set
could easily be put inside of a COPY statement. I agree that large
result sets outside of COPY could benefit from compression and perhaps
we can formulate a way to support that also.
Thanks,
Stephen