| From: | Sean O'Grady <sean(at)thingee(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Scott Ribe <scott_ribe(at)elevated-dev(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 17:32:13 |
| Message-ID: | c36c4be478c2b271600a58281711e4add367d136@hey.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
> The internal compression has to compress each record in isolation,
> which is not nearly as good as compressing the entire file as there
> are patterns that exist between records not just within records.
I see, that's makes sense. My sense is that wal_compression is really
first to alleviate disk IO pressure and secondarily as a space saving
benefit. Since I've set about archive_timeout because of a relatively
light workload, I probably shouldn't need to worry about IO issues...
Thanks,
Sean
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Wells Oliver | 2023-06-21 18:31:43 | Poor performance due to parallel seq scan on indexed date field |
| Previous Message | Cary Huang | 2023-06-21 17:18:23 | Re: SSL cert "not initialized" error with logical replication with 13.11 |