Message-ID: <447DF8A1.7070207@dunslane.net>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 16:12:17 -0400
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
	rv:1.8.0.1) Gecko/20060201 SeaMonkey/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>,
 Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de>,
	Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Possible TODO item: copy to/from pipe
References: 
 <E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E4013885E9@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk>
	<447DC5B4.4080407@pse-consulting.de>
	<60ac8yt74e.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com>
	<447DDCC3.7040304@pse-consulting.de>
	<447DE485.6040402@dunslane.net> <20060531191348.GK27220@fetter.org>
	<447DEED7.70306@dunslane.net> <20060531195812.GB12167@surnet.cl>
In-Reply-To: <20060531195812.GB12167@surnet.cl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>   
>>
>> But why is that hugely better than piping psql output to gzip?
>>     
>
> psql output has already travelled over the network.
>
>   

As I understand Tom's suggestion, it does not involve compression of 
over the wire data. He suggested that on the server you would be able to do:

  COPY mytable TO '| gzip >/home/tgl/mytable.dump.gz';


and that there could be an equivalent extension on psql's \copy command, as an alternative to doing 


  psql -c "COPY mytable TO stdout" mydb | gzip ...


It's the second piece especially that seems to me unnecessary. 


So I am still unconvinced.


cheers

andrew