From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Sam Mason" <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Are there plans to add data compression feature to postgresql? |
Date: | 2008-11-03 02:40:01 |
Message-ID: | dcc563d10811021840w1d9f7ab0gc7ed3a18a20e0bf6@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 7:19 PM, Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 10:01:31AM +0900, Craig Ringer wrote:
>> So - it's potentially even worth compressing the wire protocol for use
>> on a 100 megabit LAN if a lightweight scheme like LZO can be used.
>
> The problem is that then you're then dedicating most of a processor to
> doing the compression, one that would otherwise be engaged in doing
> useful work for other clients.
Considering the low cost of gigabit networks nowadays (even my old T42
thinkpad that's 4 years old has gigabit in it) it would be cheaper to
buy gig nics and cheap switches than to worry about the network
component most the time. On Wans it's another story of course.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Martin Gainty | 2008-11-03 02:40:45 | Re: Performance of views |
Previous Message | Nikolas Everett | 2008-11-03 02:32:42 | Re: Performance of views |