Re: An idle thought

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: An idle thought
Date: 2010-03-18 18:21:07
Message-ID: 1268936467.4053.511.camel@monkey-cat.sm.truviso.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2010-03-18 at 14:29 +0530, Gokulakannan Somasundaram wrote:

> If you want it to be cheaply updatable (or even cheaply
> readable),
> compression is not what you're going to do.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
>
> +1..

The visibility map itself is already an example of compression. If
visibility information were randomly distributed among tuples, the
visibility map would be nearly useless.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Smith 2010-03-18 18:49:28 Re: Ragged latency log data in multi-threaded pgbench
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2010-03-18 17:45:27 Re: Getting to beta1