On 2014-12-12 11:08:52 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > Unless I'm missing something, this test is showing that FPW > compression saves 298MB of WAL for 17.3 seconds of CPU time, as > against master. And compressing the whole record saves a further 1MB > of WAL for a further 13.39 seconds of CPU time. That makes > compressing the whole record sound like a pretty terrible idea - even > if you get more benefit by reducing the lower boundary, you're still > burning a ton of extra CPU time for almost no gain on the larger > records. Ouch!
Well, that test pretty much doesn't have any large records besides FPWs afaics. So it's unsurprising that it's not beneficial. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
