On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 03:11:22PM +0900, KONDO Mitsumasa wrote:
> (2013/10/15 13:33), Amit Kapila wrote:
> >Snappy is good mainly for un-compressible data, see the link below:
> >http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAAZKuFZCOCHsswQM60ioDO_hk12tA7OG3YcJA8v=4yebmoa...@mail.gmail.com
> This result was gotten in ARM architecture, it is not general CPU.
> Please see detail document.
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1aim6s/lz4_extremely_fast_compression_algorithm/c8y0ew9
> I found compression algorithm test in HBase. I don't read detail,
> but it indicates snnapy algorithm gets best performance.
> http://blog.erdemagaoglu.com/post/4605524309/lzo-vs-snappy-vs-lzf-vs-zlib-a-comparison-of
> In fact, most of modern NoSQL storages use snappy. Because it has
> good performance and good licence(BSD license).
> >I think it is bit difficult to prove that any one algorithm is best
> >for all kind of loads.
> I think it is necessary to make best efforts in community than I do
> the best choice with strict test.
> Regards,
> -- 
> Mitsumasa KONDO
> NTT Open Source Software Center

Google's lz4 is also a very nice algorithm with 33% better compression
performance than snappy and 2X the decompression performance in some
benchmarks also with a bsd license:



Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to