Added to TODO:
* Compress WAL entries [wal]
I have also added this email to TODO.detail.
---
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-04-10 at 21:12 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > > Maybe better f
On Sun, 2005-04-10 at 21:12 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > Maybe better for -hackers, but here it goes anyway...
> >
> > Has anyone looked at compressing WAL's before writing to disk? On a
> > system generating a lot of WAL it seems there might be some gains to be
> > had WA
On Sun, Apr 10, 2005 at 09:12:41PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have never heard anyone talk about it, but it seems useful. I think
> compressing the page images written on first page modification since
> checkpoint would be a big win.
Could you clarify that? Maybe I'm being naive, but it seem
""Jim C. Nasby"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> Has anyone looked at compressing WAL's before writing to disk? On a
> system generating a lot of WAL it seems there might be some gains to be
> had WAL data could be compressed before going to disk, since today's
> machines are generally more I/O bound
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> Maybe better for -hackers, but here it goes anyway...
>
> Has anyone looked at compressing WAL's before writing to disk? On a
> system generating a lot of WAL it seems there might be some gains to be
> had WAL data could be compressed before going to disk, since today's
> mac
Maybe better for -hackers, but here it goes anyway...
Has anyone looked at compressing WAL's before writing to disk? On a
system generating a lot of WAL it seems there might be some gains to be
had WAL data could be compressed before going to disk, since today's
machines are generally more I/O bou
