Re: Quick-and-dirty compression for WAL backup blocks

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Cc: Junji TERAMOTO <teramoto(dot)junji(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Quick-and-dirty compression for WAL backup blocks
Date: 2005-06-06 17:09:42
Message-ID: 8971.1118077782@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> writes:
> On Mon, 6 Jun 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> writes:
>>> Vacuum doesn't zero out the free space between lower and upper,
>>
>> It does now ;-)

> Oh :). Does it affect vacuum performance?

I haven't tried to measure it ... but certainly it's not totally free.
I'd be happy to rip that change out again.

>> Would this be institutionalizing a particular approach to data
>> compression in the XLogInsert API, though?

> The "skip the free space" optimization is still useful and worthwhile
> even if we have a more sophisticated compression method for the
> rest of the page.

Good point. OK, I'm hacking XLOG stuff now anyway so I'll see about
making that happen.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-06-06 17:49:54 Re: regexp_replace
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2005-06-06 16:43:22 Re: Quick-and-dirty compression for WAL backup blocks