| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, James Mansion <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com>, "Stephen R(dot) van den Berg" <srb(at)cuci(dot)nl>, Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Significantly larger toast tables on 8.4? |
| Date: | 2009-01-06 18:10:31 |
| Message-ID: | 200901062010.32631.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Monday 05 January 2009 18:45:49 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I did some measurements months ago, and it was very clear that libz
> compression was a lot tighter than the PGLZ code.
Back to the issue at hand. The question at the top of the thread was which of
the following behaviors we'd like by default:
(1) Compress everything within reason by default, causing slower retrieval, do
not offer substr optimization. [<= 8.3]
(2) Compress only up to 1 MB, causing faster retrieval, supporting substr
optimization. [8.4devel]
I am personally completely puzzled by option number 2. Is there even a single
use case for that?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-01-06 18:25:14 | Re: dblink vs SQL/MED - security and implementation details |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-01-06 18:02:09 | Re: pg_restore --clean text |