Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06C8912C4BAE for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2012 01:40:38 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SfkoN-0004ix-Me for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Sat, 16 Jun 2012 04:40:37 +0000 Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q5G4eF5b011142; Sat, 16 Jun 2012 00:40:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Tom Lane To: Marko Kreen cc: Magnus Hagander , Euler Taveira , Florian Pflug , Bruce Momjian , Pgsql Hackers Subject: Re: libpq compression In-reply-to: References: <4FD9698F.2090407@timbira.com> <29853.1339651170@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4FD9E70B.9040607@timbira.com> <11502.1339699384@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20120615021938.GA21704@momjian.us> <22690C61-E960-4A2A-BFD5-DAD3D3B5C474@phlo.org> <4FDB954F.9010606@timbira.com> Comments: In-reply-to Marko Kreen message dated "Sat, 16 Jun 2012 07:23:01 +0300" Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 00:40:15 -0400 Message-ID: <11141.1339821615@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Archive-Number: 201206/775 X-Sequence-Number: 209615 Marko Kreen writes: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> Fair enough if we decide that - but we should make that decision >> knowing that we're leaving the JDBC and .Net people in a bad position >> where they are not likely to be able to implement his. >> >> The JDBC people have a theoretical chance if the JDK is open. The .Net >> people are stuck with schannel that doesn't support it at this point. >> It might well do in the future (since it's in the standard); but >> they're at the mercy of Microsoft. > Both Java and C# are open-source enough that anybody can > take existing SSL implementation and add compression to it, > then distribute it as improved SSL library. Possibly more to the point: that is work they might have to do, if nobody else steps up to the plate --- and if they do end up doing it, it could benefit other projects too. On the other hand, if we roll-our-own transport compression solution, that is work they *will* have to do, with no chance of sharing the effort with other projects. BTW, as far as the .Net case goes, it took only a moment's googling to find this: http://openssl-net.sourceforge.net/ which is a .Net wrapper around real OpenSSL. It doesn't appear to provide wrappers for the compression selection functions, but surely that's just a lack of round tuits, not that it would take more than five minutes to add them. regards, tom lane