Re: libpq compression
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Cc: Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-06-15T16:03:08Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 15.06.2012 18:28, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas > <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> On 15.06.2012 17:58, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Heikki Linnakangas >>> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> You could write a dummy SSL implementation that only does compression, >>>> not >>>> encryption. Ie. only support the 'null' encryption method. That should be >>>> about the same amount of work as writing an implementation of compression >>>> using whatever protocol we would decide to use for negotiating the >>>> compression. >>> >>> Sure, but then what do you do if you actually want both? >> >> Umm, then you use a real SSL libray, not the dummy one? > > But (in this scenario, and so far nobody has proven it to be wrong) > there exists no real SSL library that does support compression. Oh, I see. Then you're screwed. But I think the right solution to that is to write/extend a Java SSL implementation to support compression, not to invent our own in PostgreSQL. The JDK is open source nowadays. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com