Re: Improving compressibility of WAL files

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>, Kyle Cordes <kyle(at)kylecordes(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Improving compressibility of WAL files
Date: 2009-01-09 05:21:19
Message-ID: 3763.1231478479@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Isn't this redundant given the existence of pglesslog?

> It does the same as pglesslog, but is simpler to use because it is
> automatic.

Which also means that everyone pays the performance penalty whether
they get any benefit or not. The point of the external solution
is to do the work only in installations that get some benefit.
We've been over this ground before...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Reg Me Please 2009-01-09 07:17:43 Re: Thanx for 8.3
Previous Message Scott Marlowe 2009-01-09 02:23:24 Re: Slow Vacuum was: vacuum output question

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2009-01-09 05:59:07 Re: New patch for Column-level privileges
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2009-01-09 04:34:44 Re: New patch for Column-level privileges