On 08/14/2014 07:24 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > We can certainly reduce that. The question was whether it would be > worth the effort to try. At this point, with three different test > data sets having shown clear space savings, I think it is worth > the effort. I'll poke into it tomorrow or over the weekend, unless > somebody beats me to it.
Note that I specifically created that data set to be a worst case: many top-level keys, no nesting, and small values. However, I don't think it's an unrealistic worst case. Interestingly, even on the unpatched, 1GB table case, the *index* on the JSONB is only 60MB. Which shows just how terrific the improvement in GIN index size/performance is. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
