On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 01:26:38PM +0530, Rahila Syed wrote:
> >I am sorry but I can't understand the above results due to wrapping.
> >Are you saying compression was twice as slow?
> CPU usage at user level (in seconds)  for compression set 'on' is 562 secs
> while that for compression  set 'off' is 354 secs. As per the readings, it
> takes little less than double CPU time to compress.
> However , the total time  taken to run 250000 transactions for each of the
> scenario is as follows,
> compression = 'on'  : 1838 secs
>             = 'off' : 1701 secs
> Different is around 140 secs.

OK, so the compression took 2x the cpu and was 8% slower.  The only
benefit is WAL files are 35% smaller?

  Bruce Momjian  <br...@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +

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

Reply via email to