Re: Question about wal_compression and what to expect

From: Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(dot)com>
To: Sean O'Grady <sean(at)thingee(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, "Wetmore, Matthew (CTR)" <matthew(dot)wetmore(at)express-scripts(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Question about wal_compression and what to expect
Date: 2023-06-21 13:55:33
Message-ID: CDC433EB-E5B0-46CC-AD36-4957419B517C@elevated-dev.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

> On Jun 21, 2023, at 7:51 AM, Sean O'Grady <sean(at)thingee(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Yes, my question was essentially do I need to separately compress WAL files for storage/archiving even with wal_compression set. So, I think you've answered my question.

If WAL files use per-page compression internally, you won't get much benefit from compressing them. If they use lz4 internally, then sure, bzip'ing them will get a little benefit, but nowhere near the normal amount.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sean O'Grady 2023-06-21 14:04:28 Re: Question about wal_compression and what to expect
Previous Message Tom Lane 2023-06-21 13:53:22 Re: SSL cert "not initialized" error with logical replication with 13.11