On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 1:43 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> Which is why things should be checked once all the options are
> processed. I'd recommend that you read the option patch a bit more,
> that may help.
I don't think that the problem here is my lack of understanding. I
have two basic concerns about your proposed patch:
1. If, as you propose, we add a new flag --compression-method=METHOD
then how will the user specify server-side compression?
2. If, as we seem to agree, the compression method is more important
than the compression level, then why is the option to set the
less-important thing called just --compress, and the option to set the
more important thing has a longer name?
I proposed to solve both of these problems by using
--compression-level=NUMBER to set the compression level and
--compress=METHOD or --server-compress=METHOD to set the algorithm and
specify on which side it is to be applied. If, instead of doing that,
we go with what you have proposed here, then I don't understand how to
fit server-side compression into the framework in a reasonably concise
way. I think we would end up with something like pg_basebackup
--compression-method=lz4 --compress-on-server, which seems rather long
and awkward. Do you have a better idea?
I think I understand what the patch is doing. I just think it creates
a problem for my patch. And I'd like to know whether you have an idea
how to solve that problem. And if not, then I'd like you to consider
the solution that I am proposing rather than the patch you've already
got.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com